Silicon shortage is so bad, that Pentium 4, Core 2 Duo and Pentium Dual made a comeback

[zoom314]

Xeon rules!

 

[freeagent]

I might have been able to do that on the non-"M" Athlon XP 3000+ that I had, but wouldn't be a big deal if I needed 1.85V or 1.825V. Those were from the days when 2.6 Ghz was a record-smashing number for AMD!


And the 2004 Asus A7N8X-X, where I did the Barton 3000+ OC'ing, had caps that suddenly were found to be bulging and leaking like Mount Vesuvius one day in 2015! (or 2014)

Because Chemi-con, a well known high quality capacitor manufacturer, unfortunately has an extremely high defect rate with their KZG series. Ones manufactured in 2004, (likely 2005 as well) were possibly the worst batch! They seem most likely to bulge and leak on motherboards made in 2004 and 2005!

All that old-school Athlon-related stuff, unfortunately is gone! Back in 2012, I didn't recall the caps being visibly bad!

I think I remember that post at OCF.

 

[lexluthermiester]

Xeon rules!

Yes they do!

 

[storm-chaser]

Athlon XP realistically competed with Willamette, basically Pentium 4, but quite lowly clocked. They topped out at just 2GHz or maybe 2.2GHz. Those chips were responsible for all that "Pentium III is faster than Pentium 4" drama initially and I can't imagine Athlon XP not beating it. Phil did benches and Athlon XP could go against 3GHz Pentium 4.

Not to mention that Athlon XPs overclocked really well and Athlon XP had mods like this (please turn down your volume):

I liked my barton core 3000+, which ran at 400Mhz FSB and 2.1GHz(or 2.2 cant remember).

But I do remember, with very low latency memory the platform itself had very low latency in general. It fact was more snappy than any single core processor I remember including any Pentium 4.

 

[lexluthermiester]

I liked my barton core 3000+, which ran at 400Mhz FSB and 2.1GHz(or 2.2 cant remember).

2.1ghz likely. There were two versions of the Barton 3000+, one that ran on the 200mhz FSB(2.1ghz) and one that ran at 166mhz FSB(2.166ghz)

 

[storm-chaser]

2.1ghz likely. There were two versions of the Burton 3000+, one that ran on the 200mhz FSB(2.1ghz) and one that ran at 166mhz FSB(2.166ghz)

Yes, I was very important to not get the red headed stepchild (166mhz FSB) at that time, lol. The 400FSB A7N8X was a great board!

 

[RJARRRPCGP]

I liked my barton core 3000+, which ran at 400Mhz FSB and 2.1GHz(or 2.2 cant remember).

But I do remember, with very low latency memory the platform had very low latency. It fact was more snappy than any single core processor I remember including Pentium 4.

2.1 is stock! That was a high stock clock for its time! It was the 166 Mhz FSB version. I'm not aware of a 200 Mhz FSB version for less than the 3200+, IIRC.

 

[lexluthermiester]

I'm not aware of a 200 Mhz FSB version for less than the 3200+, IIRC.

They made the 3000+ 200FSB version.

AMD Athlon XP 3000+ (400FSB) Specs

Barton, 1 Cores, 1 Threads, 2.1 GHz, 68 W

www.techpowerup.com

 

[Mussels]

They made the 3000+ 200FSB version.

AMD Athlon XP 3000+ (400FSB) Specs

Barton, 1 Cores, 1 Threads, 2.1 GHz, 68 W

www.techpowerup.com

OC'ers hated it, we wanted high multis and low FSB

 

[Deleted member 24505]

E6300 for me @ 3.9ghz or 3.5ghz for everyday. No better C2D for me.