Opinions AMD XP 1600+

Volibrawl
Volibrawl used Ask the Experts™
on
Does anyone know of any "issues" or special considerations regarding the AMD XP chips in the 1600-1900 range.  I will be building some systems and plan to use whichever chip gives the most bang for the bauck at the time.  Are any of them know to be "bad" .. ie unreliable, prone to overheating, etc.  I imagine the speed differences are negligible, but, if any one knows differently, please comment.  Multiple correct answers may be awarded.
Comment
Watch Question

Do more with

Expert Office
EXPERT OFFICE® is a registered trademark of EXPERTS EXCHANGE®
You said it: overheating! Make sure to get a proper CPU cooler and to mount it properly. See no other issues, its performance/price ratio is higher than P4. Got a 1800+ myself for that reason.
And make sure to get the most out of it: enough of the fastest memory etc.

Commented:
Don't forget to choose a good power supply also ...
----
My opinion :
AMD processors are good processors and have a good rate quality/price
BUT:
Too many chipsets for this type of processor ...
Ali,Sis,Via ... a bad combinaison (chipset+processor)and your system isn't reliable ... In my opinion Via is the best choice ...


I prefer to work with P4 processor and Intel chipset because there is no "bad surprise" (with a good motherboard - Asustek/Gigabyte/Abit). All softwares ( O.S / games) works without patchs or specific drivers.

Author

Commented:
Thanks for the responses  ..good and accurate information, but I may not have been clear in my question.  I plan to use an ECS K7SEM2 motherboard, I think it is a SIS chipset.  I have built several trouble-free 1600+ with it.  I am now anticipating building a batch of them with the 2000+ chip, but not if it would compromise stability or compatibility.  Since I can choose any of the 1600-2000+ chips for only incremental price differences, that is my question:

AMONG the AMD Athlon XP 1600+, 1700+, etc. thru (say) 2000+ are any of those chips substantially better or worse than the others in terms of reliability, performance, overheating, etc.  I am aware that the faster chips would get hotter and the faster chips would be marginally faster.  I am just wondering if any of them are known "lemons" or (conversely) "especially gifted" chips.
Ensure you’re charging the right price for your IT

Do you wonder if your IT business is truly profitable or if you should raise your prices? Learn how to calculate your overhead burden using our free interactive tool and use it to determine the right price for your IT services. Start calculating Now!

Commented:
Look at AMD's web site for approved MB's/PS/fan/heatsink and all will be OK. Now I use A7s333 (ASUS Socket A MB with ALI chipset and Athlon 1500+XP with 150MHz FSB (256MB DDR333 memory from Samsung) without any problems (10 hours non-stop with eccp109...)
???
The funny thing with those ASUS mobo's is that the 3rd character tell you some about the chipset:
A7V... would be an Athlon board with a VIA chipset,
A7S... Athlon + SiS chipset
A7A... Athlon + ALi chipset
And of course the P-range is for Pentium processors...

So 1175089, either that's a typo or you've bought something wrong!


I don't know of any differences between the CPU's in the 1600+ - 2000+ range, exept for the speed.
WakeupSpecialist 1

Commented:
Frache,

I saw this and had to laugh:
"All softwares ( O.S / games) works without patchs or specific drivers."
LOLOLOLOLOL....Anyway I wish you were right about that...Intel or AMD not all Softwares and OS's and Games work without patches and specified drivers.  What a wonderful computer life we would all have....
wait what am I saying?!  I'd be out of a job if that was the case.
hehehe...

dbruntonQuid, Me Anxius Sum?  Illegitimi non carborundum.

Commented:
>>> I am just wondering if any of them are known "lemons" or (conversely) "especially gifted" chips.

Too many variables to give an answer here.  For example you don't want the first release of any manufacturers chip as those are the ones that are the lemons.  The next releases (I think the correct term is steppings)  are the ones where they fix the bugs.

You may not see much of an increase in performance when going up to the next speed chip.  This depends on items such as memory being used, the chipsets on the motherboard, and graphics card being used.

Also you should be looking at the reliability of the motherboard you are choosing.  Does it have known flaws or faults?
I have a really simple question, that is going to get me "flamed" I am sure.. but, volibrawl.. are these systems for YOU or for a 'business' customer?


If you are building say .. 10 systems for a law office or something.. you shouldn't even be considering AMD.

AMD are "techies" cpu's  they have more 'tlc' needs .. if an HSF slips off a P4 2GHZ nothing happens
if it slips off an athlon xp.. woosh

and since, i have on many occasions, had my customers move computers, knock them over, etc.. it's just not worth it..

now, if the systems are for YOU.. go amd all the way, and make sure you get a VERY good COPPER hsf and ONLY use amd approved powersupplies or their BETTERS

I would say skip the 1600, 1800, and 2200, however, as they have been at many times "interim" chips or "not upto spec" for the higher speeds.. (a la the old LARGE DIE 486sx's which where 486DX's that had a failed cache module)

Author

Commented:
Again, thank you all for your fine opinions, however this was not meant to be an AMD vs Intel discussion or an ALi vs VIA discussion, or Asus is better than PCCHIPS, etc. but I appreciate all the input.

The question still remains the same  .. ALL OTHER THINGS BEING EQUAL, does anyone know of any substantial differences in reliability or performance berween the different speed chips in the AMD 1600 - 2000 range?

I assume now that if there were some known differences or "watch outs" somebody would have mentioned it.  Since nobody addressed that aspect, I will take that as a collective "I don't know of any."


Unicorn,

You addressed the question somewhat, but I am not sure what you are saying regarding the 16,18 and 22's.  Do you mean that they are like step-children, that the REAL chips are the 15,17,19,2k?

And yes, these sytems are for someone else like a "lawyer" heh,heh.  Especially if they are for a lawyer, we would WANT them to be unreliable, yes?

btw, did you hear about the lawyer who took viagra?
He got taller.


 

Author

Commented:
Unicorn, I hope my lawyer clients don't see that and think I would sell them unreliable systems! Maybe I could convince them that AMD is only for the discriminating few who are wayyyy Techie KEWL.  Kinda' like the BMW of processors.  Yeah, that's it, that is why I HAVE to charge them SO MUCH MORE than comparable Intels.  heheeh.


Voli.. good comeback...

Yes, I would call the '16, 18, and 22' the redheaded stepchildren of amd product line with the 17, 19, 2k, and 2400+ being the "quality" products...

my demonstrable example would be the fact that in many benchmarks, the xp2100+ outperforms the 2200+

I know "from memory" that the 16, 18, and 2200 are "less then wonderful" and would recommend, 1700,1900,and 2000



As for the "way cooler" -- I thought APPLE was trying that sales approach?

I tried viagra once.. i forgot to take it with water.. it got stuck in my throat.. had a stiff neck for a week.


I guess what I am saying is.. if and when I have a customer complaining to me about a computer problem, I've never heard "oh, well, you used an INTEL processor.. you must have tried to scrimp and save.."

I HAVE heard this about AMD however


For the "uber-naive" brand recognition is more important than quality, unfortunately.


Now.. does your lawyer know about corsair memory versus PNY? nopers


but they DO know intel

and dont even try to sell a stockbroker an AMD


Commented:
as far as i'm concerned, there is no difference between the XP 1600+ and the 2100+, except for clock speed. Check out the posted link. Its not extremely indepth, but it does illustrate that up to the 2100+, all the chips are architechturally identical. All run on a 266 mhz bus, all have 384 kb of on die cache, all are based on the .18 micron production process, even the number of transistors are similar ( I dont think they are identical as the site says). A direct answer to your question is to buy the fastest chip out of the lot, as this will get you higher performance with the same reliability as the slower versions. Now if you are thinking about using the new 2400+ - 2800+, then thats a totally different story. If you can justify the expense, go ahead and use the 2000+ chips.

Author

Commented:
Thanks everyone for the responses ...

My lawyer was compiling a list of those that should receive points.  Unfortunately, his Cyrix P-266 crashed after only 2 names, Unicorn and Saxman. I asked my broker to finish the list on his ultra reliable PIII, but he wanted 2.5 points commission so I declined.  I appreciate all the other contributions as well, and I apologize for leading you astray by phrasing the question poorly.

Saxman,

The "posted link" was not particularly helpful but at least it took no time to resolve the address and I found no annoying pop-up banners.

Commented:
sorry. just so that I said I did post it, here:
http://www.geek.com/procspec/amd/palomino.htm

Do more with

Expert Office
Submit tech questions to Ask the Experts™ at any time to receive solutions, advice, and new ideas from leading industry professionals.

Start 7-Day Free Trial