athlon xp 64 3000+

forcer

OSNN Senior Addict
Joined
18 Oct 2002
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?
 
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...
 
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.
 
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.
 
forcer said:
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?

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...
 
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
 
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. :)
 

Members online

No members online now.

Latest profile posts

Also Hi EP and people. I found this place again while looking through a oooollllllldddd backup. I have filled over 10TB and was looking at my collection of antiques. Any bids on the 500Mhz Win 95 fix?
Any of the SP crew still out there?
Xie wrote on Electronic Punk's profile.
Impressed you have kept this alive this long EP! So many sites have come and gone. :(

Just did some crude math and I apparently joined almost 18yrs ago, how is that possible???
hello peeps... is been some time since i last came here.
Electronic Punk wrote on Sazar's profile.
Rest in peace my friend, been trying to find you and finally did in the worst way imaginable.

Forum statistics

Threads
62,015
Messages
673,494
Members
5,621
Latest member
naeemsafi
Back