AMD Processors
Decrease font size
Increase font size
Topic Title: Duron 1.8 vs. Athlon 2000+
Topic Summary:
Created On: 09/14/2004 10:01 PM
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.
 09/14/2004 10:01 PM
User is offline View Users Profile Print this message

Author Icon
JHawk56
Elite

Posts: 1084
Joined: 07/27/2004

I may be in the market for a Socket A upgrade, and I have the luxury of looking at the low end since it would replace a Duron 850 and the fastest thing under my roof is an Athlon 1200C. The 850 is still fine for most that we do, but it's showing its age in some games. Basically I am looking to spend about $100-$125 US, roughly half of that on CPU and the other half to upgrade from an MX400 video card.

Looking at Newegg and Pricewatch, it appears Duron prices are headed north, and prices in the US are about at parity between the Duron 1.8 and the Athlon 2000+, maybe even the 2100+. I know the Duron 1.8 is already faster in MHz, and can be a great overclocker, but wouldn't you have to get it really cooking to overcome the larger cache of the Athlon? Some Newegg buyers are reporting 2.0-2.2 gig with Thorton-core 2000+ at stock Vcore.

Which is the better deal today, the fastest Duron or a low-end Athlon XP?

John

-------------------------
My ECS/PCCHIPS/Amptron PCs<br>ASRock K7VM2
 09/14/2004 10:41 PM
User is offline View Users Profile Print this message

Author Icon
eddaweaver
Senior Member

Posts: 1390
Joined: 03/10/2004

The cache would probably come in handy for games though. Doom III especially dies without the L2 cache

Thortons should overclock a heap as they're basically all sold underclocked. You'd better be careful you don't get landed with a Palomino or Thoroughbred A though.

The price is similar, so I'd prefer the Thorton. D'you think a Thorton 2000+ would do 200x12.5/2500MHz?

But out of the Durons, I'd prefer the 1.6Ghz one for the lower multiplier (for running on 200MHz FSB).
 09/15/2004 12:13 AM
User is offline View Users Profile Print this message

Author Icon
JHawk56
Elite

Posts: 1084
Joined: 07/27/2004

Thanks eddaweaver,

Your thoughts mirror mine on the cache.

I'd probably order at newegg, and they have a catalog number specifically for the Thorton. It does seem to have the best chance of overclocking, and it might run slightly cooler with that larger surface area. 2500 might be possible with boosted Vcore, but I won't get 200FSB from my K7S5A mobo. Will have to settle for 160 or 166.

I agree about the lower multiplier on the Duron 1.6. I would probably end up modding it to mobile, though, so it would not be a major factor. The 1.6 appears to have dried up at newegg.

John

-------------------------
My ECS/PCCHIPS/Amptron PCs<br>ASRock K7VM2
 09/15/2004 11:09 AM
User is offline View Users Profile Print this message

Author Icon
Wildcard
Senior Member

Posts: 929
Joined: 02/14/2004

Hi folks,

Whatever you do, don't starve the grafix department if games are your hobby.

-------------------------
. AMD CPU Data: http://www.tomshardware.com/20.../amd...ult/page23.html & http://www.amdboard.com/amdid.html
. Belarc Advisor: http://www.belarc.com/free_download.html
. GPU Comparison for Laptops: <a href="http://www.notebookche
 09/15/2004 03:26 PM
User is offline View Users Profile Print this message

Author Icon
-Milt-
Senior Member

Posts: 1722
Joined: 03/15/2004

John,

I totally agree with Wildcard... if your budget of about $100-$125 US is for both a CPU and a vid card, and this upgrade is primarily aimed at improving gaming performance, then spend the bulk of that $125 on the vid card.

Every single AMD Socket 'A' CPU currently available is based around the T-bred 'B' core, and the Barton / Thorton 'core' is also a B, but with 256K of L2 cache tacked onto one end... Here's the internal layout of the two cores... the B first, then the Barton / Thorton



The Duron Applebreds (1400 to 1800), are B's with some of the B's 256K of L2 cache disabled.
Note the Laser burns to the two L2 bridges at the upper right... = 64K of L2 cache



The Bartons (2000+ to 3200+) are B's with 256K of L2 cache added onto the end of the core.
Compare the longer, rectangular shape, with the B-core based Applebred, directly above... 512K of L2 cache



The Thorton (2000+ to 2600+) is a Barton core, but with 256K of the Barton's extra L2 cache disabled (like, they added it, and then promptly disabled it... Doh!, and running at 133 instead of the 166 of a Barton.
Again, note the Laser burn to a single L2 bridge at upper right = 256K of L2 cache



The Sempron (2200+ to 2800+) is a B (it's a B, not a Barton), running at 166MHz. 256K of L2 cache



So, after all that, my advice is to buy the lowest priced Applebred or T-bred that you can find, and hope that it's a 'good' core. i.e. a XP 2800+ capable core.
Then, do the 'L5 mod to Mobile', (you'll probably want to cut an L6 bridge or two), and crank it up as high as you can with the CMOS FSB (or CPUCooL), lowering the multiplier with software, as you raise the FSB to the highest point your memory, or mobo, will allow you to go.

Then, spend whatever is left in the budget on the best vid card you can afford.


-------------------------
Here is my new PCChips M848A' ">http://img.photobucket.com/alb...2_T-2-3-3-6-2_M848.jpg v2.1, with a 1700+ @ 2411 MHz, and my trusty old PCChips M810L' ">http://members.lycos.co.uk/mmm...00MHz_Sandra_tests.jpg v7.1A, with a Barton 2500+ @ over 3500+. Some of my fancy cars are on this pag
 09/16/2004 09:58 PM
User is offline View Users Profile Print this message

Author Icon
JHawk56
Elite

Posts: 1084
Joined: 07/27/2004

Thanks Wildcard and Milt,

I hear ya on the video card. I really do. But I am already looking at the cheapest Thoroughbred/Applebred CPUs I can find, and saving the rest for the vidcard. At newegg, which is is the only place I am ready to order from without further research, the 3 cheapest, being the Duron 1.8, 2000+T T-bred, and 2000+ Thorton, all cost the same. No difference. Zero. Zilch. Issa da same. When I first posted, the Thorton was, I think, $2 more than the other two, but even that difference is now gone.

Pricewatch has some cheaper sources, but the Applebreds and low-end T-breds are still at parity.

To keep it simple, back to newegg: Applebred (more megahertz, smaller cache. potential for awesome overclockability) or T-bred (less megahertz, larger cache, less predictable OCing), same vendor, for the same US$57.

I'd lean toward the T-breds for the cache, and specifically the Thorton to eliminate the worry of somehow getting a T-bred "A." Anyone besides eddaweaver and I have thoughts on this?

John

-------------------------
My ECS/PCCHIPS/Amptron PCs<br>ASRock K7VM2
 09/17/2004 12:29 AM
User is offline View Users Profile Print this message

Author Icon
-Milt-
Senior Member

Posts: 1722
Joined: 03/15/2004

John,

The 'risk' of getting a Duron 'A', or T-bred 'A', from Newegg today is virtually nill, but not absolute zero.

But I don't know what machine this is going into.
If it was a machine capable of really high CPU FSBs, (like 200 MHz), then I might be inclined towards the Duron.

But I think, (but don't know for sure), you are talking about your son's K7S5A, that currently has the Duron 850 @ 1055.
This would, I think, be just about ideal... he's got the PC2700 memory already in there, so an FSB of 166 is certanly possible, but not guaranteed, on the K7S5A... you could pre-test that capability with the Duron 850.
With the Duron's 13.5x multi, and good cooling, 13.5x166.6 = 2250 MHz, and I belive that is almost achievable on stock Vcore, and certainly is with one Vcore wire.

The Thorton is another good choce, but remember, these will ALL be 'Super-Locked', so you're stuck with the 12.5x multi.
But even that would give you 12.5x 166.6 MHz = 2082.5 MHz, which isn't too shabby at all.

To get anything more out of either CPU you would be required to do the 'L5 mod to Mobile', and then cut some L6 bridges.
But judging by the enthusiasm generated towards the 'blow the bridges' project on the Duron 850, with you and your son, I'd say that it just isn't going to happen, to any of these CPUs.

So is 2250 MHz with 64K the same as, or equal to, or better than, 2082.5 MHz with 256K?
I'd go with the 2082.5 and 256K, but that's just my opinion... no 'comparison tests' to back it up.
Just a gut feeling

-------------------------
Here is my new PCChips M848A' ">http://img.photobucket.com/alb...2_T-2-3-3-6-2_M848.jpg v2.1, with a 1700+ @ 2411 MHz, and my trusty old PCChips M810L' ">http://members.lycos.co.uk/mmm...00MHz_Sandra_tests.jpg v7.1A, with a Barton 2500+ @ over 3500+. Some of my fancy cars are on this pag
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