why ppl buy a 2500+ if 1700 can oc more?

heavy666 · 08-20-03, 11:33 PM

Sorry everybody its probably the most stupid question ever but, I really dont know.
If I known that a 1700 DLT3C can get much more than my 2100, had got a 1700.

I see a lot of ppl here that will buy a baraton soon. I some ppl who will upgrade to a 1700 DLT3C to a baraton that will not go so far... plz tell me why....

ninthebin · 08-21-03, 12:15 AM

my cache is bigger than yours

well thats my vague answer - the XP2500 is a good enough overclocker IMO and I just liked the idea of having more cache (despite how little apparent performance impact it holds)

SniperXX · 08-21-03, 12:19 AM

I'd say its the cache too.

cherryp00t · 08-21-03, 03:06 AM

it can oc just as well.. it all depends on luck of the draw same goes iwht the 1700+

heavy666 · 08-21-03, 11:24 AM

ok. cache but what about the 1700+ users that buy a 2100+ the cache is the same isnt it?

I saw a lot of 2100+ users that get 2800 mhz a a lot of 1700+ that get 2900 to 3500 mhz... with the same mobo and the same mem, and sometimes with the same cooler.

The Coolest · 08-21-03, 11:46 AM

I want to see someone who has hit 3500MHz.... Unless its like LN2 for a few minutes, and I bet not even stable at insane voltage.... I don't call that an overclcok

CGR · 08-21-03, 11:48 AM

3500? on an XP1700?

I have NEVER seen that high on a XP1700.

Even with LN I doubt you could even get it that high.

DManeKid · 08-21-03, 11:49 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by heavy666
ok. cache but what about the 1700+ users that buy a 2100+ the cache is the same isnt it?

I saw a lot of 2100+ users that get 2800 mhz a a lot of 1700+ that get 2900 to 3500 mhz... with the same mobo and the same mem, and sometimes with the same cooler.

O_O

i've never seen that....

Shade00 · 08-21-03, 12:09 PM

I think he must be referring to a PR rating or something. You can count on one hand how many times AMD systems have broken just 3ghz.

boffin2163 · 08-21-03, 12:34 PM

Also good stepping 1700's are getting very hard to come by

dippy_skoodlez · 08-21-03, 07:39 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by heavy666
Sorry everybody its probably the most stupid question ever but, I really dont know.
If I known that a 1700 DLT3C can get much more than my 2100, had got a 1700.

I see a lot of ppl here that will buy a baraton soon. I some ppl who will upgrade to a 1700 DLT3C to a baraton that will not go so far... plz tell me why....

The barton doing 2.2ghz is gonna do pretty much the same as a 1700+ at 2.5ghz... doesn't really matter much LOL...

just takes a bit more to get a 1700+ at 2.5ghz+

G|-|oST · 08-22-03, 06:31 AM

I think the more exact number is a Barton core running at 2.38GHz is approximately equal to a T-Bred running at 2.5GHz. (This is based on some calculations by hitechjb1). If this is correct, then people can look at it in two ways.

1 - Get the 1700+ (good stepping) - its cheaper, AND gets you higher CPU speed as reported by WCPUID. Lets face it, higher numbers always look great, for both benchmarking, and bragging rights.

2 - Get the 2500+ (most recent steppings are good). Easy to get your hands on one, newer technology, double the L2 cache, plus easier to get to 2.38GHz then getting a 1700 to 2.5GHz.

heavy666 · 08-22-03, 09:52 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by DManeKid
O_O

i've never seen that....

ok maybe its not that high but take a look at signatures on 2 ppl that posted here.
Shade00
Tbred-B 1700+ JIUHB DLT3C 0307 VMPW@ 2230

G|-|oST
Barton 2500+ [217 x 11] 2388 MHz 1.75V

58 mhz is not that much. but I see that the performace is probably much higher in 2500+.

I think I will buy a 1700+ with a good steping and sell my 2100+

Col_Loki · 08-22-03, 05:11 PM

Ehhh the difference there is 158Mhz

!!

Think the main reason people are getting bartons is that they are more lightly to get 2.4ghz - 2.5ghz (Tbred) performance from the chip, which is quite nice IMO. Ie a barton is far more lightly to hit 2.4ghz than a Tbred Xp1700+ hit 2.5ghz - but they will both perform around the same level.

From what ive seen lately the bartons are outclocking the Xp1700's , add that to the extra cache and its a great chip !!

[edit] PS where did you get the 3500mhz thing from ?? Now that would be a pretty fine chip

q149 · 08-22-03, 05:26 PM

Bartons are faster at the same speeds and they can OC just as well.

heavy666 · 08-23-03, 12:43 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by Col_Loki
Ehhh the difference there is 158Mhz !!

Think the main reason people are getting bartons is that they are more lightly to get 2.4ghz - 2.5ghz (Tbred) performance from the chip, which is quite nice IMO. Ie a barton is far more lightly to hit 2.4ghz than a Tbred Xp1700+ hit 2.5ghz - but they will both perform around the same level.

From what ive seen lately the bartons are outclocking the Xp1700's , add that to the extra cache and its a great chip !!

[edit] PS where did you get the 3500mhz thing from ?? Now that would be a pretty fine chip

I dont math very well

I dont know english too.
ok I never sow a 1700+ at 3 ghz but I sow here someone one the extreme cooling forum with fsb 170 * 20 3400 mhz. I dont know why he put a low fsb on so high mult. maybe the ram

well I see that there is a difference between the cpus but someone here agree that theres isnt that much at neweeg a 1700+ is U$ 60,00,
and 112 a 2500+

RobP4P · 08-23-03, 12:46 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by heavy666
I some ppl who will upgrade to a 1700 DLT3C to a baraton that will not go so far... plz tell me why....

a little insurance...I'm guaranteed at LEAST 2500 with a barton

the cache is cool too I guess

mata2974 · 08-23-03, 02:19 AM

Quote:

Also good stepping 1700's are getting very hard to come by

just go to excaliberpc they have them.................

treepop · 08-23-03, 03:34 AM

lets say you get the best of the best 1700+'s thats 2.5-2.6ghz on air......an equally good barton would hit 2.4.-2.5 gHz.......I actually used to own a barton and I personaly hit 2.4gHz with one.......I took it back because at the time it cost me $199 and the 1700+ was $70 so I opted fot the cheaper.....now that the barton is around $100 and the 1700+ is still $70 I would opt for a barton....due to the (maybe little) added performance....it's just worth the extra $30 to some people for a 3-5% boost....thats my best answer

G|-|oST · 08-23-03, 07:26 AM

Treepop brings up a good point - take a look at the price differnce at the time of the purchase, and also availability. I got my 0310 WPMW 1700+ at the time when the 2500+ would cost me almost double, so that decision was easy for me.

Later, after I foolishly fried that 1700, and needed a replacement, the Barton cost me only a little more than a new 1700 would, plus it was available locally, so I didn't have to wait. So, again the choice was easy, 2500 it is.

One is not clearly superior to the other, they are both amazing little chips, but one may be better than the other in different situations.

08-20-03, 11:33 PM	Thread Starter #1
heavy666 Member Join Date: Apr 2003 Location: Rio de Janeiro @ Brazil	why ppl buy a 2500+ if 1700 can oc more? Sorry everybody its probably the most stupid question ever but, I really dont know. If I known that a 1700 DLT3C can get much more than my 2100, had got a 1700. I see a lot of ppl here that will buy a baraton soon. I some ppl who will upgrade to a 1700 DLT3C to a baraton that will not go so far... plz tell me why.... __________________ =D New Rig running @ stock for now... Asus M4A78T-E Phenom II X4 955 Kingston 2X 2GB 1333MHz Seagate Barracuda 7200.12 PSU Corsair 450VX. Using on-board VGA, looking for a U$ 150,00 VGA.
	QUOTE Thanks

08-21-03, 12:15 AM	#2
ninthebin Member Join Date: Mar 2002 Location: Liverpool, UK	my cache is bigger than yours well thats my vague answer - the XP2500 is a good enough overclocker IMO and I just liked the idea of having more cache (despite how little apparent performance impact it holds)
	QUOTE Thanks

08-21-03, 12:19 AM	#3
SniperXX Member Join Date: Jul 2002 Location: Folding in Diamond Bar	I'd say its the cache too. __________________ i7 920 @ 4.2Ghz Asus Rampage II GENE 2x BFG GTX285 6GB Crucial Dominator 1600 Crucial 750TX Help find cures for cancer by running Folding @ Home. HEATWARE
	QUOTE Thanks

08-21-03, 03:06 AM	#4
cherryp00t Member Join Date: Apr 2003 Location: Brooklyn	it can oc just as well.. it all depends on luck of the draw same goes iwht the 1700+
	QUOTE Thanks

08-21-03, 11:24 AM	Thread Starter #5
heavy666 Member Join Date: Apr 2003 Location: Rio de Janeiro @ Brazil	ok. cache but what about the 1700+ users that buy a 2100+ the cache is the same isnt it? I saw a lot of 2100+ users that get 2800 mhz a a lot of 1700+ that get 2900 to 3500 mhz... with the same mobo and the same mem, and sometimes with the same cooler. __________________ =D New Rig running @ stock for now... Asus M4A78T-E Phenom II X4 955 Kingston 2X 2GB 1333MHz Seagate Barracuda 7200.12 PSU Corsair 450VX. Using on-board VGA, looking for a U$ 150,00 VGA.
	QUOTE Thanks

why ppl buy a 2500+ if 1700 can oc more?

Internet Services

Website Development

Tech Hardware

08-21-03, 11:46 AM	#6
The Coolest Senior Member Join Date: Jul 2001 Location: Tel Aviv, Israel	I want to see someone who has hit 3500MHz.... Unless its like LN2 for a few minutes, and I bet not even stable at insane voltage.... I don't call that an overclcok __________________ "<The_Coolest> You can't unwaste wasted CPU cycles" - Start FOLDing now! Main rig: Core i7 2600K 3.4GHz @ 4.5GHz (Scythe Mugen2) / Mobo: Biostar TP67XE / SSD: Crucial M4 128GB (+ HDDs) / GPU: HD5450 or 8800 Ultra / Mem: 4x4GB DDR3-1600 G.Skill 4GBXL RipJaws X - 16GB total / PSU: Seasonic S12II 620W. Secondary rig: Core i3 540 3.06GHz @ Stock / Mobo: MSI H55M-ED55 / GPU: Integrated / Mem: 2x2GB DDR3-1600 G.Skill 4GBRL RipJaws - 4GB total / PSU: FSP ATX350-PNR 350W. Core Temp - Accurate temperature monitor for Intel's Core/Core 2 and AMD64 processors Heatware
	QUOTE Thanks

08-21-03, 11:48 AM	#7
CGR Member Join Date: Jan 2001 Location: Lower NY	3500? on an XP1700? I have NEVER seen that high on a XP1700. Even with LN I doubt you could even get it that high. __________________ Main System:.................................................. ......................Second System: DFI BloodIron P35-T2RL w/ Q6600 GO@ 3.2 (9x360), 1.4v....DFI Ultra-D w/Opteron 170 @ 2.7 G.skill 4GB (2x2gb).................................................. ..............G.Skill Extreme 2GB (2x1gb) HIS 4850 680/1108.................................................. .............Nvidia 7600GT WD VRaptor 300gb/Seagate 1TB..........................................Raptor 74gb/Seagate 200gb OCZ GameXtreme 600SLI
	QUOTE Thanks

08-21-03, 12:09 PM	#9
Shade00 Member Join Date: Oct 2002 Location: Louisiana Tech University	I think he must be referring to a PR rating or something. You can count on one hand how many times AMD systems have broken just 3ghz.
	QUOTE Thanks

08-21-03, 12:34 PM	#10
boffin2163 Member Join Date: Jun 2002 Location: U.K	Also good stepping 1700's are getting very hard to come by __________________ http://server5.uploadit.org/files/blitz2163-sig2.jpg
	QUOTE Thanks

08-22-03, 06:31 AM	#12
G\|-\|oST Member Join Date: Apr 2003	I think the more exact number is a Barton core running at 2.38GHz is approximately equal to a T-Bred running at 2.5GHz. (This is based on some calculations by hitechjb1). If this is correct, then people can look at it in two ways. 1 - Get the 1700+ (good stepping) - its cheaper, AND gets you higher CPU speed as reported by WCPUID. Lets face it, higher numbers always look great, for both benchmarking, and bragging rights. 2 - Get the 2500+ (most recent steppings are good). Easy to get your hands on one, newer technology, double the L2 cache, plus easier to get to 2.38GHz then getting a 1700 to 2.5GHz.
	QUOTE Thanks

08-22-03, 05:11 PM	#14
Col_Loki Member Join Date: Jul 2003	Ehhh the difference there is 158Mhz !! Think the main reason people are getting bartons is that they are more lightly to get 2.4ghz - 2.5ghz (Tbred) performance from the chip, which is quite nice IMO. Ie a barton is far more lightly to hit 2.4ghz than a Tbred Xp1700+ hit 2.5ghz - but they will both perform around the same level. From what ive seen lately the bartons are outclocking the Xp1700's , add that to the extra cache and its a great chip !! [edit] PS where did you get the 3500mhz thing from ?? Now that would be a pretty fine chip
	QUOTE Thanks

08-22-03, 05:26 PM	#15
q149 Member Join Date: Nov 2002 Location: Japan	Bartons are faster at the same speeds and they can OC just as well.
	QUOTE Thanks

08-23-03, 03:34 AM	#19
treepop Member Join Date: Mar 2003 Location: Houston, Texas H-TOWN!	lets say you get the best of the best 1700+'s thats 2.5-2.6ghz on air......an equally good barton would hit 2.4.-2.5 gHz.......I actually used to own a barton and I personaly hit 2.4gHz with one.......I took it back because at the time it cost me $199 and the 1700+ was $70 so I opted fot the cheaper.....now that the barton is around $100 and the 1700+ is still $70 I would opt for a barton....due to the (maybe little) added performance....it's just worth the extra $30 to some people for a 3-5% boost....thats my best answer __________________ How to overclock your i3/i5/i7 in 5min WORKED FOR ME! Mobo: MSI P55M-GD41 Proc/cooling: i5-750 w/ Corsair H50 cooling @ 4ghz (200 x 20) Ram: G.SKILL Ripjaws Series 16GB (4 x 4GB) DDR3 1600 HD/OS: Seagate 320gig // HITACHI Deskstar 2TB 32MB Cache // 2 x external 1TB Drives for backup Windows 7 x64 Power Supply: Corsair 620HX Case: Antec 900 w/ 3x120mm and 1x200mm fans Monitor: 2 x 23" Dell IPS Displays Sound: M-Audio Studiophile AV 40's powered by an X-FI Xtreme Music Video:Nvidia GTX 480 HEAT 8-0-0
	QUOTE Thanks

08-23-03, 07:26 AM	#20
G\|-\|oST Member Join Date: Apr 2003	Treepop brings up a good point - take a look at the price differnce at the time of the purchase, and also availability. I got my 0310 WPMW 1700+ at the time when the 2500+ would cost me almost double, so that decision was easy for me. Later, after I foolishly fried that 1700, and needed a replacement, the Barton cost me only a little more than a new 1700 would, plus it was available locally, so I didn't have to wait. So, again the choice was easy, 2500 it is. One is not clearly superior to the other, they are both amazing little chips, but one may be better than the other in different situations.
	QUOTE Thanks

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
Show Printable Version Email this Page	Search this Thread: Advanced Search