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.

What the Heck Is This - AMD 64 For $215?

Discussion in 'AMD Thunderbird' started by Peter van der Goes, Dec 13, 2003.

  1. AMD Athlon 64 3000+ advertised on Newegg for $215 US?

    http://www.newegg.com/app/ViewProductDesc.asp?description=19-103-425&catalog=343&depa=1

    What is the difference between this and the 3200+ advertised for $404?

    For $215, I'm ready to jump!

    --
    **********************************************************************
    ** All opinions are mine alone.Do not attribute elsewhere!
    **********************************************************************
    ** Peter van der Goes, Professor, Computers & Information Technology
    ** Rose State College
    *********************** Contact ************************************
    ** Office e-mail:
    ** Home e-mail:
    ** Web Page: http://www.rose.edu/Faculty/pvan/index.htm
    **********************************************************************
     
    Peter van der Goes, Dec 13, 2003
    #1
    1. Advertisements

  2. Peter van der Goes

    Ed Guest

    Ed, Dec 13, 2003
    #2
    1. Advertisements

  3. Peter van der Goes

    rstlne Guest

    Click the link he provided there Ed
    It's got a athlon XP 64 3000+ listed
    his question is
    Why is the 3000+ xp64 half the price of the 3200+ xp64..
     
    rstlne, Dec 13, 2003
    #3
  4. Peter van der Goes

    rms Guest

    AMD Athlon 64 3000+ advertised on Newegg for $215 US?http://www.newegg.com/app/ViewProductDesc.asp?description=19-103-425&catalog=343&depa=1

    I believe there is an error in the listing: The 3000+ *I believe* has
    512k L2, not 1MB as shown in the ad.

    However, this is a fascinating cpu at first glance. It is the same
    price as the AthlonXP 3000 400fsb, but is an Athlon64 !! Can it overclock
    better than the XP?? Can it beat it in 32-bit benchmarks ?? Inquiring
    Minds Want To Know !!

    rms
     
    rms, Dec 13, 2003
    #4
  5. Peter van der Goes

    Ed Guest

    Sorry!

    Well from what I can tell so far (still on my 1st cup of java) the specs
    they show don't jive with picture they show for the CPU.

    The OPN on the CPU in that picture ends with 4AP, a 5 means 1MB L2, not
    sure what 4 means, but I'm guessing the "4" here means it's a 512K L2
    chip.

    Ed
     
    Ed, Dec 13, 2003
    #5
  6. Peter van der Goes

    J.Clarke Guest

    According to AMD
    <http://139.95.253.213:80/SRVS/CGI-BIN/WEBCGI.EXE/,/?St=32,E=0000000000
    129549964,K=4744,Sxi=6,Solution=4273> the "P4" indicates cache size and
    the "3000" indicates clock speed, but their chart doesn't list the
    actual values associated with those numbers, so your guess may be right
    on.

    I was just about to order parts for a new system--with that processor
    available I need to reevaluate my plans.
     
    J.Clarke, Dec 13, 2003
    #6
  7. Not only that, but the ad *says* it runs at the same speed (2.0 GHz) as the
    Athlon 64 3200+.
    That gives credence to the theory of 512k L2, which would account for the
    3000+ vs. 3200+ rating?

    Does anybody have any info on the planned range of Socket 754 chips? Perhaps
    the 3000+ is designed as the bargain entry level to move us to 64 bit?
     
    Peter van der Goes, Dec 13, 2003
    #7
  8. Peter van der Goes

    Tone-EQ Guest

    Correct. AMD are releasing this processor in January (i.e. after the busy
    Christmas period), this will also allow them time to manufacture a small
    inventory of stock. I can't believe that is on sale already... ;-D

    "For 1000 units AMD presented a price of 278,- USD for the Athlon 64 3000+
    (1,8 GHz). In spite of the current strong Euro this means that a end-user in
    Europe have to pay over 300,- Euro. But as we found out, the end-user-price
    will go down for 220 to 240 Euro, when the Product finally comes
    (End-December or Beginning-January) to the market. This means, that the
    3000+ will be half so expensive, than the 3200+. But it also means, that AMD
    wants to sell it "after" Christmas." Taken from:
    http://www.tweakpc.de/mehr_all.php?news_id=4844

    It's in German, so go here to get it translated:
    http://www.systransoft.com/

    --
    Regards,
    Tony. (tony.cue(at)tiscali.co.uk)

    Discogs: building the definitive database of electronic music...
    http://www.discogs.com

    Asus A7N8X Deluxe (Revision 1.04, BIOS 1007)
    AMD AthlonXP 2400+ @ 2800+ (TBred-B, 13.5 x 166, 1.7VCore)
    1Gb (2 x 512) Samsung PC3200 400Mhz DDR RAM Dual Channel
    (M368L6423DTM/CC400)
     
    Tone-EQ, Dec 14, 2003
    #8
  9. Peter van der Goes

    Tone-EQ Guest

    AMD Athlon 64 3000+ advertised on Newegg for $215 US?
    I really hope this helps AMD to catch up a bit more with Intel. AMD have the
    32/64bit technology path almost perfected and at VERY sensible prices too,
    could this really be an Intel killer?

    Interesting interview with Scott McNealy from Sun Microsystems, worth a read
    for AMD or Intel users, especially the "What made you choose AMD Opteron
    over Intel Itanium?" question and the next question near the end, very
    true...
    http://www.computing.co.uk/News/1151480

    --
    Regards,
    Tony. (tony.cue(at)tiscali.co.uk)

    Discogs: building the definitive database of electronic music...
    http://www.discogs.com

    Asus A7N8X Deluxe (Revision 1.04, BIOS 1007)
    AMD AthlonXP 2400+ @ 2800+ (TBred-B, 13.5 x 166, 1.7VCore)
    1Gb (2 x 512) Samsung PC3200 400Mhz DDR RAM Dual Channel
    (M368L6423DTM/CC400)
     
    Tone-EQ, Dec 14, 2003
    #9
  10. Well, I guess I'll have to get a clarification from Newegg, as they
    advertise it as a 2.0 GHz CPU. As Newegg.com is one of our (US) best
    regarded and most reliable suppliers, I'd say it's on sale right now, at
    least over here.
     
    Peter van der Goes, Dec 14, 2003
    #10
  11. Peter van der Goes

    Guest Guest

    http://www.anandtech.com/news/shownews.html?i=21087


    Here is another tread on this matter, and google has tons of hits. I'm
    busy soaking this in while we have a severe cold front moving thru
    today. ;-)

    I will have to research this one because I was about to go 64 bit
    after the holidays.

    Any confirmed benchmarks on this new chip?

    Thanks!!!
     
    Guest, Dec 14, 2003
    #11
  12. Peter van der Goes

    rms Guest

    Any confirmed benchmarks on this new chip?

    Someone on the futuremark forums is reporting scores with it.

    rms
     
    rms, Dec 14, 2003
    #12
  13. Peter van der Goes

    Amir Facade Guest

    www.pcworld.com has reviewed some systems with the 64 in them. They have
    gotten the highest scores so far on their proprietary benchmarks.
     
    Amir Facade, Dec 14, 2003
    #13
  14. Peter van der Goes

    J.Clarke Guest

    That's not what he was asking--he wants to know how the 3000 stacks up
    to the 3200.
     
    J.Clarke, Dec 14, 2003
    #14
  15. Peter van der Goes

    Guest Guest

    Exactly what I want to know. Any comparison benchmarks between the
    3000+ and the 3200+ - 64 bit models by AMD.

    Thanks

    J> On Sat, 13 Dec 2003 22:35:26 -0500

    J> That's not what he was asking--he wants to know how the 3000
    J> stacks up to the 3200.

    J> -- -- --John Reply to jclarke at ae tee tee global dot net (was
    J> jclarke at eye bee em dot net)
     
    Guest, Dec 14, 2003
    #15
  16. Now, I'm talking to myself :)
    Just Googled around a bit and found some articles asserting the Athlon 64
    3000+ is a 2 GHz chip with 512k L2 cache and others claiming it's a 1.8 GHz
    chip with 1MB L2 cache. I have a query in to Newegg.com to see if they will
    clarify the specs on what they have in stock.
     
    Peter van der Goes, Dec 14, 2003
    #16
  17. Peter van der Goes

    stacey Guest


    Shame AMD started this "performance rating" thing so no one really know what
    they are selling!
     
    stacey, Dec 14, 2003
    #17
  18. Peter van der Goes

    rstlne Guest


    What a Moronic statement..

    Okay, a p4 1.7ghz will do how much better than a p4 3.2ghz
    Just based on that info, you got no fucking clue do you.. Cause at the end
    of the day it doesnt really matter.. You have to test something to see how
    it rates.. False numbers or true numbers are both useless unless they are
    tested under real condition numbers..
     
    rstlne, Dec 14, 2003
    #18
  19. Peter van der Goes

    stacey Guest

    A good bit? :)
    My point was what is this chip? Some people say it's a 1.8 with 1 meg of
    cache, others say they saw where it's a 2.0 with 512. I don't like a
    manufacturer -assuming- I'm too stupid to be able to figure out what
    actually numbers relate too. If I'm doing something where more cache isn't
    going to help performance, I could choose the 512 cache version. If the gz
    is going to hurt performace like video encoding, I'd spend the extra bucks
    for the faster chip. With "3200+" etc I have "No fu^&ing clue" what the
    chip even is! But then AMD fanboys can't fathom that AMD can do any wrong!
     
    stacey, Dec 15, 2003
    #19
  20. Peter van der Goes

    Frank Howell Guest

    Frank Howell, Dec 27, 2003
    #20
    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.