1. This forum section is a read-only archive which contains old newsgroup posts. If you wish to post a query, please do so in one of our main forum sections (here). This way you will get a faster, better response from the members on Motherboard Point.

Did I make a mistake?

Discussion in 'AMD Thunderbird' started by Ransack The Elder, Jul 1, 2003.

  1. Ordered a new processor today, I ordered the XP 2600+. Should I have gotten
    the Barton 2500 instead? I went with clock speed over cache, both are the
    same price. Would the slower Barton's extra cache be better for video
    capturing/editing?
     
    Ransack The Elder, Jul 1, 2003
    #1
    1. Advertisements

  2. Ransack The Elder

    Wes Newell Guest

    Yes, you should have gotten the Barton. Both will probably clock to about
    the same speed, but the Barton has twice the L2 cache.
     
    Wes Newell, Jul 1, 2003
    #2
    1. Advertisements

  3. They don't clock the same though, the Barton is about 200 mhz less.
     
    Ransack The Elder, Jul 1, 2003
    #3
  4. Ransack The Elder

    B Guest

    On board cache is very important when rendering huge video imagery or
    digital pictures. Bigger cache is the more important factor in this
    "particular" case as opposed to clock speed. The ability to address large
    amounts of memory is also vitally important. The Apple G5 processor is by
    far the best processor on the market for rendering imagery but I am waiting
    to see how the NEW AMD processor is going to do. AMD has waited far too long
    to release the chip and now Apple is stealing some of their thunder.

    regards

    B
     
    B, Jul 1, 2003
    #4
  5. Ransack The Elder

    777ouse Guest

    Hey guess just an opion of mine i have a 2400 and a 2500... the xp2400
    clocks at 2.0 mhz and the xp2500 is 1.853mhz .. the 2500 will out run my
    2400 all day long the chache and the 333fsb of the 2500 makes a world of
    difference..
     
    777ouse, Jul 4, 2003
    #5
  6. My 2600 is 333mhz just like the Barton, so would the little bit of extra
    cache really make the 2500 Barton that much faster than the 2600? I mean if
    I dump the 2600 for the Barton, will that cut 10-20 minutes off a video
    transcode that takes an hour now??

    I seriously doubt it.
     
    Ransack The Elder, Jul 5, 2003
    #6
  7. Ransack The Elder

    Wes Newell Guest

    If you are really needing serious performance, and your MB supports a
    200MHz FSb, you should set your 2600+ to run 11x200. That should give
    about a 20% increase in performance.
     
    Wes Newell, Jul 5, 2003
    #7
    1. Advertisements

Ask a Question

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

You'll need to choose a username for the site, which only take a couple of moments (here). After that, you can post your question and our members will help you out.