Barton XP3000 benchies

[Toscani]

http://www.deviantpc.com/reviews/barton3000/index.shtml
http://www.sudhian.com/showdocs.cfm?aid=324
http://www.amdworld.co.uk/bar3000.htm
http://www.xbitlabs.com/cpu/athlonxp-3000/
http://www.hothardware.com/hh_files/CCAM/amd_axp_3k+.shtml
http://www.aceshardware.com/read.jsp?id=50000364
http://www.bit-tech.net/review/180/8
http://www.extremetech.com/article2/0,3973,873603,00.asp
http://tech-report.com/reviews/2003q1/athlonxp-3000/index.x?pg=1
http://www.hardwarezone.com/articles/articles.hwz?cid=2&aid=628
http://www.anandtech.com/cpu/showdoc.html?i=1783
http://www.tomshardware.com/cpu/20030210/index.html

I need to see if it will work on my KT7A

 

[Pinky]

4% 3d mark advantage over the Intel 3.06ghz isn't astounding, and that's one of its better leads over the Intel chips.

What astounds me is that it's running at like 2.2ghz, making up a 30% clock frequency deficit in changes to its architecture and cache alone.

 

[pacino]

4% 3d mark advantage over the Intel 3.06ghz isn't astounding, and that's one of its better leads over the Intel chips.

What astounds me is that it's running at like 2.2ghz, making up a 30% clock frequency deficit in changes to its architecture and cache alone.

That raises up the question: "What if that baby OCed?"

 

[Pinky]

That raises up the question: "What if that baby OCed?"

I'd still likely be running it stock.

 

[scott123]

Looks good for AMD

 

[DaddyB]

4% 3d mark advantage over the Intel 3.06ghz isn't astounding, and that's one of its better leads over the Intel chips.

What astounds me is that it's running at like 2.2ghz, making up a 30% clock frequency deficit in changes to its architecture and cache alone.

All of the benchmarks I read showed the 3.06ghz beating the xp3000 in 3dmark with and without HT turned on. Mind you the P4 didnt win buy much but it did win.