AMD- Winchester 64 3200 or Barton Athlon 3200?

Status
Not open for further replies.

True_Orb

Daemon Poster
Messages
765
I am looking to spend between 200-250 for a new AMD processor for my new rig.

I dunno about you guys, but my comps generally keep me happy for at least 4 years. A year ago I would have gone Barton 3200 in a heart beat, but now it seems like 64 might be the way to go.

Here I see a $3 difference between a Socket A Barton 3200 XP
http://www.newegg.com/app/ViewProdu...-103-390&depa=1

and a Socket 939 Winchester 3200 64.
http://www.newegg.com/app/viewprodu...-103-502&DEPA=0

I must be missing something, right? It looks damn tempting to me.
Barton (XP)
Model: AMD Athlon XP 3200+
-Core: Barton
-Operating Frequency: 2.2GHz
-FSB: 400MHz
-Cache: L1/64K+64K; L2/512K
-Voltage: 1.65V
-Process: 0.13Micron
-Socket: Socket A
-Multimedia Instruction: MMX, SSE, 3DNOW!, 3DNOW!+
-Packaging: Retail Box (Heatsink and Fan included)

Winchester (64)
Specifications:
-Model: Athlon 64 3200+
-Core: Winchester
-Operating Frequency: 2.0GHz
-FSB: Integrated into Chip
-Cache: L1/64K+64K; L2/ 512KB
-Voltage: 1.5V
-Process: 90nm
-Socket: Socket 939
-Multimedia Instruction: MMX, SSE, SSE2, 3DNOW!, 3DNOW!+
-Warranty: 3-year MFG
-Packaging: Retail(with Heatsink and Fan)


What am I missing about this deal, it seems a no-brainer for the 64. I notice a few differences but I do not know their significance.
 
Technically the Baton is faster in clock speed but the Winchester has alot faster fsb... The Winchester has 64 bit which will allow it to be usable when windows xp 64bit comes out in a year or less. There a few applications that utilize it now, but most don't. With that said I would still get the Winchester... Everyone who has the 64bit processors noticed a big increase in speed from 32bit processors of the same frequency (ghz). Also what motherboard were you planning on using?
 
I am not sure, because I haven't decided on the CPU yet.

Also I might jump higher now that its been a year since I initially set my heart on the Barton 3200, but the only reason I would get 64 would be for future apps, I have never before heard it gave a performance increase.

Is there is an AMD 64 with faster clock speed than the Barton but same FSB for under like $240?
 
Well the AMD 64's don't have a set fsb, or if they do Idk what it is, I believe I heard its somewhere around 2000mhz? I have no clue about that. That is the best AMD 64 bit u can get for under $240... it can also be overclocked as needed.
 
Well then I guess the relevent question is, does the FSB, 64-bit, and Socket 939 out-perform the 200 extra mHz provided by the Barton, considering a Socket 939 and 64-bit CPU are better for future technology.
 
DON"T LOOK AT MHZ DUDE. come on don't be like one of those dudes. The athlon 64 has like 1600MHZ FSB. No question, get the 64 bit man. YOu need a different mobo for the 64 than for the 3200
 
LOL, well I probably don't know as much as most, but I figured there was enough significance to mHz to wonder about the factors.

I realize I will need a new mobo, any suggestions? ASUS has been what I settled on for the Barton, but people seem to be saying A-Bit K8 something or other for Socket 939.
 
Abit AV8 Third Eye is the best imo... And yes the 64bit would be faster provided it is 200mhz slower....
 
I can't find it on newegg. Well, I don't see Third Eye anyway, just this...

ABIT "AV8" K8T800 Pro Chipset Motherboard for AMD Socket 939 CPU -RETAIL


Model# AV8
Item # N82E16813127181

Specifications:
Supported CPU: AMD Athlon64/Athlon64 FX Processors
Chipset: VIA K8T800 Pro + VT8237
RAM: 4x DIMM for DDR400/333/266 Max 4GB
IDE: 2x ATA 133 up to 4 Devices
Slots: 1x AGP 8X/4X , 5x PCI
Ports: 2xPS/2,1xCOM,1xLPT,SPDIF In/Out,8xUSB2.0(Rear 4),3xIEEE1394(Rear 1),1xLAN,Audio Ports
Onboard Audio: 6-Channel AC97 Codec
Onboard LAN: VIA VT6122 Gigabit Ethernet
Onboard SATA/RAID: 2x Serial ATA, RAID 0/1
Onboard 1394: 3 Ports
Form Factor: ATX
 
might i suggest going socket A and just overclocking? i know this is probably not a popular opinion but it will save you shitloads of money... just to give you an alternate... my 2400+ overclocked to 2.58 ghz gets benches above 3.6ghz intels( never seen a compatible bench for the 64's yet) and it cost me 83 dollars... like i said you might not decide to go this way but it is extremely cost effective and still very high performance
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom