Athlon XP 1600+ versus Athlon XP 1800+

**vesther** · November 24th, 2001, 10:52 PM

Just letting you know that I already have lost $150 to a "killed" Athlon Processor. I probably can't afford to lose another $250 just to replace another Revision G Palomino whatsoever. I would like to know if I should just keep the 1600+ or just switch to the 1800+.

**Praetorian** · November 24th, 2001, 11:00 PM

First, did it die or did you kill it? And I would probably switch to a 1900+ to get the best performance. I hope to be upgrading to a 1.4ghz after Christmas. I'll be getting the MSI K7N420 Pro (might change my mind later) w/ 512mb DDR ram. I hope everything goes as planned.

**RADAR1797** · November 24th, 2001, 11:18 PM

Actually I would go with an XP 1700+ and overclock the hell out of it. They are running about $136 right now.

-RADAR

**vesther** · November 24th, 2001, 11:26 PM

My Revision C T-Bird died because I "killed" the T-Bird's Core (There was a crack in the sides, and also I had someone mount the Heatsink for me, and he put too much Arctic Silver on top of the Die, so the clean-up written over the bridges). The reason why I had to switch to a Revision G Palomino 1600+ was because of the dead die on my 1.4GHz Revision C T-Bird. The Palomino 1600+ is working FINE and I currently have no problems now (I had to use the Thermaltake Volcano 6Cu+ because the Vantec ended up to be too noisy, and my parents were complaining about the noise).

**RADAR1797** · November 24th, 2001, 11:27 PM

Oh well in that case, stick with the 1600+. Tell us how far you overclock it!

-RADAR

**Praetorian** · November 24th, 2001, 11:29 PM

Radar, where can I find a 1700+ for that price? I was planning on buying an Athlon 1.4ghz for $121 at newegg.com. I'd pay a few extra bucks for something better.

**vesther** · November 24th, 2001, 11:32 PM

Originally posted by RADAR1797
Oh well in that case, stick with the 1600+. Tell us how far you overclock it!

-RADAR

You should be shocked but I'm definitely NOT an overclocker by all means (I leave the Processor and Voltage Settings as it is, Manufacturers probably advise you not to overclock your processor). I was basically told by the repairman who fixed my PC so that I can run an XP Processor under my Asus A7M266 Board not to overclock the processor whatsoever. I also have learned that the Arctic Silver II Clean-Up was too messy and the guy who mounted the Vantec on top of my Revision C T-Bird for me put too much. Once the Arctic Silver II reached its peak performance, the ASII "melted" onto certain bridge parts that my CPU got damaged because of the ASII's damaging capabilities if you put too much Arctic Silver II (That is why you should use Arctic Alumina instead of Arctic Silver II as a CPU Preservation Measure).

**RADAR1797** · November 24th, 2001, 11:50 PM

vesther,

Go to www.pricewatch.com and you will see the 1700+ for $136. As for overclocking, I am running my T-Bird 1.33 GHz at 1.5 GHz using a 167 MHz FSB. Overclocking is safe and fun as long as you do not do something silly. Overclocking at stock voltage will not hurt a CPU at all (ok say at least 5 years). If I had a 1600+, I would see if it did 1.6 GHz, many do and you are only shorting yourself if you don't try to see all that your CPU can do. If safety is your biggest concern, then don't overclock.

-RADAR

**FreakyOCR** · November 25th, 2001, 12:03 AM

Hey vas, can I buy that dead T-Bird off of you???

**jadison** · November 25th, 2001, 12:31 AM

I had to use the Thermaltake Volcano 6Cu+

I read the review on this heatsink/fan compared to several other top-notch H/F combo's and it was the overall winner as far as cooling went. I'm thinking about purchasing this cooler, would that be a good choice? I don't care about it being loud or not!

Currently running Athlon 1.2GHz w/384MB RAM
Current CPU temp @ idle: 42.8 *C

thx for the info.

-=jd=-

**DutchMaster** · November 25th, 2001, 01:18 AM

Hmm I am working with an "ol'skool" 1400MHz processor (unlocked) with PC 2100 Memory(that meens running on memorybus runs 266Mhz), do I need an upgrade to AMD XP?

**vesther** · November 25th, 2001, 01:24 AM

Originally posted by DutchMaster
Hmm I am working with an "ol'skool" 1400MHz processor (unlocked) with PC 2100 Memory(that meens running on memorybus runs 266Mhz), do I need an upgrade to AMD XP?

There is basically no need to upgrade to Athlon XP unless you are planning to use Windows XP as your Op System or unless you are an enthusiast who lives for the latest technology. The only time you would need to upgrade your processor is when your processor becomes obsolete and/or the Revision C Thunderbird you are currently using is broken because (commonly) the Die is chipped.

BTW DutchMaster, what HSF are you using? I hope you are using a Kick-Ass HSF because T-Birds generate more heat and use up more power than the Athlon XP.

**FreakyOCR** · November 25th, 2001, 02:33 AM

Why would Windows XP be a prerequisite to using an Athlon XP???

**DutchMaster** · November 25th, 2001, 02:45 AM

Vesther I dropped the Post with some sarcasm

I have XP BTW but I don't see the need to upgrade anyway.

But you're good mentioning:

BTW DutchMaster, what HSF are you using? I hope you are using a Kick-Ass HSF because T-Birds generate more heat and use up more power than the Athlon XP.

You're right about that the T-bird is running hot with the coolmaster HSF which BTW is in the list of recommended HSF for the 1400MHz. But I'm looking for a "cooler" solution.
Any good ideas here? Really need a cheap but good HSF (best bang for the $$) here. "Thermal Take" aren't easy to get here

**vesther** · November 25th, 2001, 10:53 AM

Originally posted by FreakyOCR
Why would Windows XP be a prerequisite to using an Athlon XP???

No, Windows XP ISN'T a Pre-Req to use an Athlon XP. I'm just mentioning that Windows XP is best when utilizing the Athlon XP. Any processor would work fine, but what I'm trying to point out is that you can get the most out of Windows XP by just using the Athlon XP.

**Tomteriffic** · November 25th, 2001, 11:21 AM

Another reason for the XP is if you are using any programs that support the Intel SSE optimizations. The XP's got 'em. A lot of my pro audio apps are tweaked for the SSE instruction set, so, yesterday I picked up a 1600+ (For $129 at a local show).

The machine isn't all the way together with regard to audio interfaces and applications, but I did run a few benchmarks w/Sandra. A little O/C from 1.4 to 1.51 was painless, didn't even need a voltage bump, and after thrashing it with the Sandra burn-in wizard for about 45 min, the temp was only 40C with a copper cooler and a medium output, quiet fan on it.

The CPU and Multimedia benchmarks in Sandra showed this thing absolutely THRASHING a 1.6 Ghz P4. I mean seriously outrunning it

**Thud** · November 25th, 2001, 11:30 AM

Getting back to the original question:

I would like to know if I should just keep the 1600+ or just switch to the 1800+.

Who's to say but you? Do you feel that you're in need of a more powerful processor? If so, buy the 1800+, or better yet the 1900+. Otherwise, stick with the one you have.

**Thud** · November 25th, 2001, 12:01 PM

I just rethought my position, and decided that the 1600+ is an inferior piece of crap.

Therefore, it is my opinion that you should order a superior model (1800 or 1900) and send me the 1600+ immediatley for proper disposal.

**MrLuigi** · November 25th, 2001, 07:02 PM

I am presently running my XP1600+ at 11.5 x 133 @1.85v...Motherboard see the CPU as a 1800+. Unlocked the CPU using a similar method to the one posted over at Tom's Hardware. I think the 1600+ is a great bang for your buck choice.
BTW using a copper gladiator HS/80mm fan on an Iwill KK266 mobo.