a64 vs barton

[_MID_Viking]

just another noob quisten what clock speed would a barton need to get same speed as a64

[Gizmo]

Supposedly, the A64 3000+ and the Athlon 3000+ have about the same performance. The Athlon with a Barton core runs at about 2.167 GHz, and the A64 runs at about 2 GHz. So the A64 will tend to run a clock that is about 7-10% slower than the equivalent Barton.

However, this ignores some important things. For example:

The A64 supports SSE2. The Barton does not.
The A64 can run 64-bit software. This will tend to net about a 15-20% gain.
The A64 has the memory controller built into the chip. The Barton does not. This means that data can be transfered to and from memory faster by the A64.

All in all, the PR rating for the A64 is more conservative than for the Barton, IMHO. This represents a better performance curve for the user. Bartons still provide more bang for the buck at this stage, but not by a large margin, and that margin is steadily shrinking, again IMHO.

[_MID_Viking]

let me c i got this right
so an a64 is about 10-15% faster than its barton brother

how dose the a64 oc

[Gizmo]

The current generation OCs only moderately from what I have read. Not bad, but not great. You will get something in the neighborhood of a 10% or so OC out of one, probably. Once AMD switches fully to the 90 nM process, things should get better.

An A64 will be about 10-15% than its barton brother if both chips are the same clock speed (e.g. 2.0 GHz). The A64 will be slightly to somewhat faster than the Barton if they both have the same PR # (e.g. 3000+). How much faster depends on what you are doing and whether you are running 32-bit or 64-bit apps. Bear in mind that there are precious few applications that can run 64-bit, and most of those are either high dollar or rather esoteric.

[cadaveca]

imho...the 64 is too new...released early to get extra funds to streamline the production process. you can get comparable performance from a lesser athlon, by overclocking, but like gizmo said, you forego a few things by doing so. Wait about 18 months, when we will actually start seeing more 64 bit apps out there, and buy one then. if ya can't wait....be prepared to be dissapointed when the next generation comes out and is 30% cheaper.
you just gotta think..someone had to made a proc for longhorn..and they gotta sell it to get people to beta test longhorn....

yes i totaly agree infact i just sold my amd 64 3200/an50r system. so i can tell you from experiance that the 64 system is nice and all that but the ocs where disapointing and the chipsets for the mb right now in my honest opion suck. ill wait til the new 64's come out then around dec or jan ill consider another go at the 64 system but right now ill just stick to my intel 3.0c and my molbile 2600.....

peace perc,

[_MID_Viking]

so when i get some better ram my comp vould be about the same speed as a a64 3200
*my mobil 2500 run 193x13 *2.5gzh*

[danrok]

The big benefit of the A64's is having the memory controller on the CPU. This makes it less comparable to a barton system. The nature of the beast has changed.

The performance gain provided by the new memory controller will still apply even when the A64 is in 32-bit mode running ye olde WinXP.

[purplemohawkman]

imho i think the a64 is impractical at the moment, or at least for the average user, yeah its a nice new technology but to buy one before the rest of the indurstry catches up is what is keeping me form buying one atm. im waiting on pci express to come out before i justify a major system upgrade

[danrok]

We're all waiting for Intel to catch up...

[cadaveca]

i'm really waiting for the "new" sony stuff to come out....8-12 processor cells sounds dandy to me.