athlon xp 64 3000+

Discussion in 'General Hardware' started by forcer, Apr 28, 2004.

  1. forcer

    forcer OSNN Senior Addict

    Messages:
    413
    i just got an athlon XP 64 3000+ processor, which 'apparently' runs at 3.0Ghz. the bloke who installs it said everything was fine, i done a system check to find that its running at 2.0 so i phoned him and he says "yes, it says that but its actually running at 3.0 it just doesnt show up"

    so he is claiming my processor is running at 3.0ghz when dxdiag, sisoft sandra and windows properties say its running at 2.0ghz

    i find him hard to believe.

    does any1 else know anything about this?
     
  2. Umm, as far as I know Athlon's havent even reached the 2.3ghz level let alone 3.0!
    The Athlon 64 3400+ runs at 2.2Ghz...
     
  3. Oh and I have a plain old Athlon XP 3000+ and that runs at 2.17Ghz, so I would presume thats the same for the 64bit version.
     
  4. Electronic Punk

    Electronic Punk Administrator Staff Member Political User Folding Team

    Messages:
    18,589
    Location:
    Copenhagen, Denmark
    You have and haven't been tricked.

    What AMD are saying, with the whole + thing, is that it will run at the equivelent of a 3 gig processor. Or that used to be the case.
     
  5. Sazar

    Sazar F@H - Is it in you? Staff Member Political User Folding Team

    Messages:
    14,905
    Location:
    Between Austin and Tampa
    the bloke who installed it for you is a retard...

    your processor is the same as an athlon64 3200+ except you have half the L2 cache (512kb v/s 1Mb)

    the rating is a 3000+ although it smacks the pants of any 3200+ athlon xp processor which is a bit confusing...

    the rating itself will not show up... the rating != the speed of the processor.. it hasn't for a long time for athlons and its unlikely to in the future the way both intel and AMD are moving from speed as the be all/end all...
     
  6. melon

    melon MS-DOS 2.0 Political User

    Messages:
    854
    Location:
    Ásgarðr
    AMD processors are more efficient than Intel processors. The 3000+ was AMD's way to market these CPUs to a public that gauged performance by higher GHz numbers, even though Intel's higher numbers were less efficient. So, the 3000+ is to imply that it is equivalent to a 3.0 GHz Intel processor, and, yes, the AMD processor probably does have an actual GHz of 2.0, but that is to be expected. Don't worry.

    Melon
     
  7. Bootsy

    Bootsy Huh?

    Messages:
    1,124
    Location:
    Miami, Fl
    I dont think you were tricked, I just think either the guy who installed it is a retard as Sazar said, or he just didnt want to go through explaining to you what the nice folks above just explained. :)