• Welcome to Overclockers Forums! Join us to reply in threads, receive reduced ads, and to customize your site experience!

2400 + Review

Overclockers is supported by our readers. When you click a link to make a purchase, we may earn a commission. Learn More.
good stuff it looks like the 2400+ will be hitting the same speeds as the 2600+ not that supriseing tho consdering they both are on the same core and were released at the same time
 
i would think the xp2400 @ 2.3ghz would be smoking the 2.53ghz P4. Whats up with the close scores, and on some test the stock speed of the 2.53 p4 beat the overclocked xp2400 @ 2.3ghz.
I wonder if the p4 was on rdr. I wonder what ram they used on the xp amd system. I personally would have like to see the 2.3ghz xp chip do alot better then that. Maybe the ram wasnt the best:(

AZN
 
Somebody threw the idea that the small amount of cache would be limiting the athlon once the speed is pushed so far. According to him, there might even be a point when they are on par speed and powerwise!

I'm not really techie enough to know if he's just bull****ting, or really knows what he's saying, but it's making me feel like waiting for the barton.
 
i liked the fact that the athlon seemed to handle his resolutions in games better than the p4 did.

example : q3 @ 800x600

p4 - 325.2fps
athlon @ 2.3ghz - 303.6fps

difference - 21.6fps

----------------------------
q3 @ 1280x1024
p4 - 213.3fps
athlon @ 2.3ghz - 209.5

difference 3.8 fps
----------------------------

when run at 1600x1200 then athlon is actually (just) faster.
how? its not using dual channel ddr. surely there isnt enough bandwidth there for it to be able to beat the p4. even if its on 553ddr and not rdr
 
I think the problem is those guys don't seem like pros at overclocking. Wait till some of us get our hands on that thing :) I'm gonna be popping a 2400, nForce2, and some DDRII400 into a bong-cooled watercooling system in about six weeks (provided that nForce2 and DDRII prices are somewhat reasonable, of course). You'll be seeing 2.5 GHz hopefully.

That article didn't mention ram, cooling, or anything like that. For all we know that was on the stock heatsink. And I think somewhere they were mentioning the 533 FSB of the P4. The rdram would explain the P4's high 3dmark scores. for us to be keeping up with a 153/306 FSB (what they ran at) really says something though :) nForce2 better be good, we'll be tha damaja!

--Illah
 
exactly. if this was with average components. i cant wait to see what it does to the p4 when its running with dual channel ddr400. mmmmmmmmm......
 
I just can't wait until AMD gets some more steppings out later this year, or Barton with the 512k cache. This stepping is showing a decent OC, even if they aren't trying hard. But with an AGOGA or AGOIA equivalent these things will be at least on par with P4 2.8 or better. And Barton should be able to take on a P4 3.0 stock. OC that beast and you will have one hell of a pentium killer...
Futura
 
Come on, at least 2 of you wondered about what kind of RAM was used and it said right in the review...

256MB CAS2 DDR333 SDRAM
256MB TwinMOS CAS2.5 DDR400 SDRAM (for 2.53GHz Pentium 4)
Click to expand...

you can see that here. If the P4 2.53ghz with DDR RAM smokes the xp2600 that bad I wonder what the 2.8ghz on RDRAM will do. Even with the XP OC'd to xp2800 speeds (2300mhz) it barely kept up to the P4, imagine what the results would have been if they OC'd that P4 too. I think maybe AMD should have lowered the PR ratings even more then they did to compare to the P4 B chips, maybe the 2.13ghz should have been the xp2400.
 
O man, thats very dissapointing. I just skimmed through the review. The ram wasnt to far off, so the 2.3ghz should have smoked the stock p4... what gives?

AZN
 
im a little muddled.
I thought the (stock) p4 2.53 run on 533mhz (133*4)
but, according to this, its running on ddr400.
now, if it is running on ddr 400 (which would be 200*4,right?) then it wont be running at 2.53ghz, will it?
so it would be waaaay overclocked and therefore unfair. or am i missing something?
 
Yeah, but all those tests were 3dmark. 3dmark is so dependent on memory that my score didn't change AT ALL when I got a new chip and went from 1722 MHz to 1886 MHz. Why? Cuz my FSB stayed the same (same RAM), therefor there was no boost in the mem bandwith. The P4 is still 94 MHz over the AMD in the memory.

--Illah
 
what im saying is its impossible for the p4 2.53 to run at stock speed when running on a 200mhz bus(ddr 400) because of its locked multiplier.surely the tests must be false, then?

oh and i understand about the memory - i have seen it on a friends athlon. but how did you get 94mhz?
The P4 is still 94 MHz over the AMD in the memory
Click to expand...

im not saying your wrong, im just curious lol
 
DaddyB said:
Come on, at least 2 of you wondered about what kind of RAM was used and it said right in the review...



you can see that here. If the P4 2.53ghz with DDR RAM smokes the xp2600 that bad I wonder what the 2.8ghz on RDRAM will do. Even with the XP OC'd to xp2800 speeds (2300mhz) it barely kept up to the P4, imagine what the results would have been if they OC'd that P4 too. I think maybe AMD should have lowered the PR ratings even more then they did to compare to the P4 B chips, maybe the 2.13ghz should have been the xp2400.
Click to expand...


I was wonderig about the firingsquad's numbers since they don't seem to reflect those at other sites such as Tom and Anand . My point is the fact that if buying AMD , the 2400 is a far better buy . it is a pencil trick unlock and reaches 2600 and beyond speeds easily . Supposed to be cheap too .
 
Yeah I agree with that, Tom's and other sites used the 2.53 with RDRAM and the xp2600 still beat it for the most part, I dont know how this site got the reults it did. although the P4 usually does win in 3dmark and quake 3 benches. I was just commenting on these particualar benchmarks not the overall performance of the chips...never heard of this site before maybe they are just Intel fanboys.
 
I don't know how they did it ...... but I'll defend them a little as I have found the to be among the most neutral of sites . they are also very hardhitting and pull very few if any punches . I even saw them microwave a review game cd cause they thought it was so poor !! It's the microwave award or something like that ( i think it was them ). they have also had no problems giving games like "Black and White " and C&C Renegade bad reviews when everyone else was praising them .
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

mackerel
HEDT is back - Zen 4 TR pro and non-pro
Replies
7
Views
509
TerranBrackiatt
TerranBrackiatt
Overclockers.com
FRONTPAGE Essencore KLEVV CRAS XR5 RGB 32GB DDR5-8000 Memory Kit Review
Replies
11
Views
1K
Sologuy
S
S
4x4GB DDR3 Overclock on AM3+
Replies
2
Views
376
Sologuy
S
Overclockers.com
FRONTPAGE G.Skill Trident Z5 Neo RGB 64GB DDR5-6000 CL30 Memory Kit Review (AMD EXPO)
Replies
2
Views
2K
Woomack
W
D
New Laptop this year
Replies
8
Views
457
Dravenspur
D
Back