Which CPU better for overall performance...?

GHoosdumGHoosdum Icrontian
edited May 2004 in Hardware
I have a choice between an XP2600+ Barton chip (1.9 GHz), or an XP2700+ TBred-B chip (2.17 GHz).

The PC only has 512MB RAM (with 32MB shared to video). My gut tells me hands down the 2700+ is the better choice for both folding and everyday performance, but the small amount of RAM the PC has makes me think maybe, just maybe the higher cache of the Barton might make up for it.

This is going to be running in my sister's (soon to be my parents') PC, with a Soyo KM400 mobo in it (333FSB max).

Opinons? Facts? ;)

Thanks!

Comments

  • ThraxThrax 🐌 Austin, TX Icrontian
    edited May 2004
    217MHz > 512 L2 cache.
  • entropyentropy Yah-Der-Hey (Wisconsin)
    edited May 2004
    lol mhz ... 2.17 ghz maybe :p
  • ThraxThrax 🐌 Austin, TX Icrontian
    edited May 2004
    2170MHz - 1900MHz = 217MHz > 512kb L2 Cache
  • qparadoxqparadox Vancouver, BC
    edited May 2004
    He's talking about the frequency diff. In my experience the extra cache is worth about 10% extra "MHz" (if that makes any sense) versus a t-bird and 15% extra "Mhz" versus a Duron. So it'd be pretty close, you might want to check on the thermal dissapation on both as less heat = ability to make a quieter PC. I'd go with the one that dissapates less heat, they won't notice a performance diff either way.
  • GHoosdumGHoosdum Icrontian
    edited May 2004
    I do believe the PC is going to be receiving the gift of 2.17 GHz pretty soon... ;)
  • entropyentropy Yah-Der-Hey (Wisconsin)
    edited May 2004
    ah ok, my bad thrax
  • Omega65Omega65 Philadelphia, Pa
    edited May 2004
    If that XP 2600+ is an XP Mobile 2600+ (14.5x 133mhz = 1.93ghz) then it can run at 2.17ghz (13x 166mhz) no problemo
  • GHoosdumGHoosdum Icrontian
    edited May 2004
    Nope, definitely not an XP-M chip.
Sign In or Register to comment.