xp or 64

[kramer]

i was planning on spending about $180 on an athlon xp 2500 and motherboard.

a couple people are saying i should get 64. should i switch. how much would the 64 and motherboard be. or is their a processor in between the two i should get. i heard something about an mp

[Carbine]

Any AMD 64 is over $180 right now unless you find a super deal. So I say go for the 2500+ because its the best out right now for pretty low prices.

[kramer]

ok forget that then. i know you can put a mobile processor in a pc. im planning on getting a xp 2500. should i get mobile instead. can i still overclock it. do i need to install it different. its about $20 more than the pc version

[Cricket]

Do a search of this forum for 2500+ MP and read what Tin Cannary has to say about the overclocking ability of this processor. Pretty impressive processor.

Cricket

[QuickSilver]

The 2500+ is very flexible, mobile or not. I speak from expierience.

[imbest123]

The 2500+ can hit from 2.5-2.7Ghz on average on air. It operates at a lower voltage and it can withstand higher temps, which is crucial for overclocking.

[QuickSilver]

2.5 to 2.7 is not exactly average, more like the high end of the spectrum. AMD only desighned that core to run at 2.2, so anything beyond that, you are getting lucky.

[imbest123]

Ya but if you do that wire trick then you can enable the fsb to reach more than 230Mhz.

[QuickSilver]

The days of the wire trick are gone my friend.

[MaxRat]

can some one shed some light on this subject of the Athlon 64? Amd says the 64 is 10 to 15% faster than it's XP counterpart...This does not measure up for me?

Lets say for instance we use the Xp 3000 with a 400fsb as compared to a 64 3000 ... they both pretty much run at 2.0g but where it gets confusing is the fsb capabilities... The Xp 3000 runs a 400fsb and from what I have read the 64 has an on chip 1600fsb....If my math is correct wouldn't this be 300% faster? Or does the fsb not negate as much performance as one would think? Because to me 10 to 15 percent doesnt justify me spending hard earned coin to upgrade just yet....That seem like a minimal amount even with hypertransport....Either this chip is way underated or there is a lot of bugs to work out....Confused

[QuickSilver]

64 bit is yet in it's infancy.

[Alfie]

The speed gain is mainly from the memory controller built into the cpu.
If one examines bottlenecks in a system,the cpu to memory is one.
The 64 cpu eliminates the need for a seperate memory controller and therefore runs faster.

[yellohut]

I would go for the XP.. it's been aroundfor a while, and all the kinks have been worked out; and it's cheaper!

and the Athlon XP MP line is for multiple processor systems.. it's the same chip, but AMD tested those to make absolutely sure they would work in a multiple processor setting.
at least that's what I've been told (I actually read it here on one of the forums i think.)

[mb26]

The days of the wire trick are gone my friend.

not with the mobile ones i dont think.

if u want to overclock, IMO it would be crazy not to get a mobile 2500. u have wayy more chance of getting a higher speed. i mean, if u wanted an unlocked 2500 barton (and the 2500m is unlocked) it would cost more! (and when u make ur next computer, u could get a barebones laptop and stuff it in there too lol)

and 2.5ghz i wouldn't say was the high end of the spectrum.. perhaps 2.7ghz is but 2.5 is average i'd say.

also the mobile is likely to run at a lower Voltage for the same speed.. which means cooler, and less cooling needed.

remember however, the mobile 2500 doesn't come with a HSF and is slightly more expensive, so if your on a *really* tight budget then the 2500 is cheaper.. but the mobile is def. worth it.

also, MP is usually for multiprocessor, the usual 'notation' for the mobile is just XP-M

[CrazyMike]

Depends on what your using your processor for, if your running a server the AMD 64 is a good choice. Otherwise it's very expensive and there isn't many programs/games that really demand a 64 Bit processor these days.

[vanga]

I would definetly sugesst going with the athlon xp rught now (assuming you wont be using the 46 to its potential) the cost for a 64 system is sky high and they havet even come out with an os that fully supprots it yet. (though longhorn is on the way)

Take a look at this page the top right corner has a good deal on a athlon xp 2800+ bundle with heatsink and ram.


and the rest of the page has 2500+ CPU & MB bundles for much less then what your about to pay.

http://www.tigerdirect.com/applicati...ge=3&CatId=188

[glc]

Uh huh. Tiger costs more than Newegg when you compare exact components, the only good deals at Tiger are for substandard components like PC Chips based boards and generic ram. I don't see any Abit boards in those bundles, and the only Asus boards I see are the -X models which are the budget boards. I do see Soyo, but they aren't top end either.

[TwoRails]

I'm not an OCer, but I have to ask, since the 2500+ MP is only a 266 FSB unit, how far do you need to go to get it as fast, overall, as the XP 333 FSB unit?

Also, don't forget that the A64, and the FX models are indeed a very fast 32 bit CPU. They are also ready for prime time; if not, then supercomputer makers, such as the world famous Cray would not be making super computers with the Opteron (the MP version of the FX) chip.

[QuickSilver]

Hmm. That would be a concern for me as well. Can you push a mobile 2500+ to 400 FSB? Or do you have to OC on the multi? If the answer to the latter question is yes, then there is little advantage to a mobile.