AMD Processors
Decrease font size
Increase font size
Topic Title: Athlon MP VS. Modified MP-able Athlon XP
Topic Summary:
Created On: 11/23/2003 05:42 AM
Status: Read Only
Linear : Threading : Single : Branch
Search Topic Search Topic
Topic Tools Topic Tools
View similar topics View similar topics
View topic in raw text format. Print this topic.
 11/23/2003 05:42 AM
User is offline View Users Profile Print this message

Author Icon
carltao
Member

Posts: 35
Joined: 10/07/2003

Does XP have the same core as MP with MP-switch disabled? Both have similar performances.
Thanks.

-------------------------
AthlonXP1800+ 200x10@1.400V 200x11@1.575V 200x11.5@1.650V
AVC 112C86FBH
Huntkey(Maybe the best power brand of China) Rock-355
EPoX 8RDA3+ Rev 2.0
ATi Radeon9000(Not gamer ^_^)
TwinMOS CSP DDR400 256Mx2 2-2-3-11@2.77V

WD1
 11/23/2003 07:59 AM
User is offline View Users Profile Print this message

Author Icon
pcy
Senior Member

Posts: 2029
Joined: 10/18/2003

Yes. In particular if you take an XP and re-connct the rightmost L5 bridge, it does seem to convert an XP into an MP.

However, the MPs run at 133Mhz (I think), wheras the current faster XPs run at 166 (or 200)Mhz.

It's not clear which, if any, of the MP mobos have the ability to run a 166 FSB. The Asus A7M266-D did, but it's not made any more.


Peter
 11/23/2003 02:29 PM
User is offline View Users Profile Print this message

Author Icon
Xtc4u
Senior Member

Posts: 240
Joined: 10/10/2003

even with the MP board only supporting 133 but the CPUs using 266 you can change the multipliers to match the speed. Since AMD has starting to lock the multiplier ability people using MP rigs will have to stick with MP chips instead of using modded XPs.

-------------------------
Search the stars with overclockers.com seti team.

Main.............................................Secondary
<span style='color:#00
 11/24/2003 02:42 AM
User is offline View Users Profile Print this message

Author Icon
carltao
Member

Posts: 35
Joined: 10/07/2003

QUOTE (pcy @ Nov 23 2003, 04:59 AM) Yes. In particular if you take an XP and re-connct the rightmost L5 bridge, it does seem to convert an XP into an MP.

However, the MPs run at 133Mhz (I think), wheras the current faster XPs run at 166 (or 200)Mhz.

It's not clear which, if any, of the MP mobos have the ability to run a 166 FSB. The Asus A7M266-D did, but it's not made any more.


Peter
Thanks,
Where can I find a detailed performance comparison for the two kinds of CPUs? Do they have noticeable performance differences at the same frequency?

Thanks again

-------------------------
AthlonXP1800+ 200x10@1.400V 200x11@1.575V 200x11.5@1.650V
AVC 112C86FBH
Huntkey(Maybe the best power brand of China) Rock-355
EPoX 8RDA3+ Rev 2.0
ATi Radeon9000(Not gamer ^_^)
TwinMOS CSP DDR400 256Mx2 2-2-3-11@2.77V

WD1
 11/24/2003 07:55 AM
User is offline View Users Profile Print this message

Author Icon
pcy
Senior Member

Posts: 2029
Joined: 10/18/2003

QUOTE (Xtc4u @ Nov 23 2003, 11:29 AM)even with the MP board only supporting 133 but the CPUs using 266 you can change the multipliers to match the speed.  Since AMD has starting to lock the multiplier ability people using MP rigs will have to stick with MP chips instead of using modded XPs.
Yes... but then you are running the RAM at 133Mhz; and the weakest link of the MP setup is memory bandwidth. If RAM is the bottleneck you won't get the benefit of the faster CPU.


Peter

 11/24/2003 08:14 AM
User is offline View Users Profile Print this message

Author Icon
pcy
Senior Member

Posts: 2029
Joined: 10/18/2003

QUOTE (carltao @ Nov 23 2003, 11:42 PM)QUOTE (pcy @ Nov 23 2003, 04:59 AM) Yes. In particular if you take an XP and re-connct the rightmost L5 bridge, it does seem to convert an XP into an MP.

However, the MPs run at 133Mhz (I think), wheras the current faster XPs run at 166 (or 200)Mhz.

It's not clear which, if any, of the MP mobos have the ability to run a 166 FSB. The Asus A7M266-D did, but it's not made any more.


Peter
Thanks,
Where can I find a detailed performance comparison for the two kinds of CPUs? Do they have noticeable performance differences at the same frequency?

Thanks again
I have never seen a comparative review of XP vs MP.


Assuming I'm right about the 133 166 thing. Anybody?


This is what I would expect to see:

If you had an XP Tbred (ar 166Mhz) vs a MP Tbred (at 133) than the CPU performance would be the same, but the memory bandwidth fot the MP would be lower.

So it would depend on what software you are running.

Programs where memory bandwidth was the limiting factor would run slower. Since a MP has two CPUs sharing the same memory bandwidth, the same progams probably would not show a huge improvement going from a single CPU to a dual.

Programs where RAW CPU power is the critical actor should see the full benefit of the faster CPU. Assuming they can use a dual at all, those programs would see close to double the performance comparing a single to a dual.

I think I saw somewher that the MP2800 is a Barton. That means it has a bigger cache, but probably the same raw Mhz as an MP 2600. The bigger cache would decrease the dependency on memory bandwidth.

So... comparing the MP2800 to the MP2600, you get the opposite effect - ie very little improvement where raw CPU is the only significant performance factor, but full benefit where memory bandwidth is the limit.



Peter

 11/25/2003 09:45 AM
User is offline View Users Profile Print this message

Author Icon
carltao
Member

Posts: 35
Joined: 10/07/2003

QUOTE (pcy @ Nov 24 2003, 05:14 AM) I have never seen a comparative review of XP vs MP.


Assuming I'm right about the 133 166 thing. Anybody?


This is what I would expect to see:

If you had an XP Tbred (ar 166Mhz) vs a MP Tbred (at 133) than the CPU performance would be the same, but the memory bandwidth fot the MP would be lower.

So it would depend on what software you are running.

Programs where memory bandwidth was the limiting factor would run slower. Since a MP has two CPUs sharing the same memory bandwidth, the same progams probably would not show a huge improvement going from a single CPU to a dual.

Programs where RAW CPU power is the critical actor should see the full benefit of the faster CPU. Assuming they can use a dual at all, those programs would see close to double the performance comparing a single to a dual.

I think I saw somewher that the MP2800 is a Barton. That means it has a bigger cache, but probably the same raw Mhz as an MP 2600. The bigger cache would decrease the dependency on memory bandwidth.

So... comparing the MP2800 to the MP2600, you get the opposite effect - ie very little improvement where  raw CPU is the only significant performance factor, but full benefit where memory bandwidth is the limit.



Peter
Thanks, Peter,

It seems that your answer is

Single XP VS Dual MP
Barton MP VS TBred MP

and I want to know is

Dual Athlon MP VS Dual Athlon XP-mod-MP
at the same frequence/FSB/memory parameters



Did anybody do the comparison?

-------------------------
AthlonXP1800+ 200x10@1.400V 200x11@1.575V 200x11.5@1.650V
AVC 112C86FBH
Huntkey(Maybe the best power brand of China) Rock-355
EPoX 8RDA3+ Rev 2.0
ATi Radeon9000(Not gamer ^_^)
TwinMOS CSP DDR400 256Mx2 2-2-3-11@2.77V

WD1
 11/25/2003 11:05 AM
User is offline View Users Profile Print this message

Author Icon
pcy
Senior Member

Posts: 2029
Joined: 10/18/2003

QUOTE (carltao @ Nov 25 2003, 06:45 AM)

... What I want to know is

Dual Athlon MP VS Dual Athlon XP-mod-MP
at the same frequence/FSB/memory parameters



Did anybody do the comparison?

No I doubt anybody has done this comparison.

Since the MPs all run a FSB at 133Mhz, and the latest XPs have run at 166Mhz you can't really run a "Dual Athlon MP VS Dual Athlon XP-mod-MP at the same frequence/FSB/memory parameters".

But if you took an older/slower XP that did run at 133Mhz, and with the same CPU multiplier as an MP, then the XP moded to MP would run at the same speed as the MP because they are, in effect, the same CPU.

The answers I gave before are my estimate of what you would find comparing single XP to dual MP and Dual mod-XP (running a 166Mhz FSB) vs a genuine Dual MP.


Peter
Statistics
112018 users are registered to the AMD Processors forum.
There are currently 0 users logged in.

FuseTalk Hosting Executive Plan v3.2 - © 1999-2014 FuseTalk Inc. All rights reserved.



Contact AMD Terms and Conditions ©2007 Advanced Micro Devices, Inc. Privacy Trademark information