what is the processor speed of an amd athalon 3200+

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

i am used to looking at intels and they just give u the nice 3.0 Ghz or whatever beside it.

 

 

 

-----------------------

 

 

 

k i looked about a bit and found it, and i think its 2Ghz am i correct?

2GHZ indeed.

 

 

 

Are you interested in gaming? AMD > Intel for gaming.

well i was in Tesco and seen a pc for ÃÆââ¬Å¡Ãâã600. it seemed like a good deal but it did have a printer and now that it is a 2Ghz processor im not even gonna give it a 2nd look

Tesco computers... Yuch... And I got the AMD Athlon 3200+ Barton 2.2Ghz, it runs games PERFECTLY... And if you want to... Clock it, but make sure you got the right heat-sink and CPU cooler.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

But Tesco... Sheesh. *Hides Tesco from people*

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

//Mitch

well i was in Tesco and seen a pc for ÃÆââ¬Å¡Ãâã600. it seemed like a good deal but it did have a printer and now that it is a 2Ghz processor im not even gonna give it a 2nd look

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Its not all about the ghz, you dont need insanely high clock speeds to get performance like Intel has been showing for years.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

With the 3000+, 3200+, ect, what amd have been trying to say is that despite lower clock speeds, you can expect the same performance from a 3000+ athlon as what you would get in a 3ghz pentium 4.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

It might have lower clock speeds, but it can still offer as good or better performance than its Intel equivelant.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

If any of this is wrong, misleading or other what ever, feel free to correct me.

 

well i was in Tesco and seen a pc for ÃÆââ¬Å¡Ãâã600. it seemed like a good deal but it did have a printer and now that it is a 2Ghz processor im not even gonna give it a 2nd look

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Its not all about the ghz, you dont need insanely high clock speeds to get performance like Intel has been showing for years.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

With the 3000+, 3200+, ect, what amd have been trying to say is that despite lower clock speeds, you can expect the same performance from a 3000+ athlon as what you would get in a 3ghz pentium 4.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

It might have lower clock speeds, but it can still offer as good or better performance than its Intel equivelant.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

If any of this is wrong, misleading or other what ever, feel free to correct me.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

i agree.. its about the operations per second not the speed...

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

belive it or not your brain runs on a 14 mhz speed clock... but its the massive processing power of billions of the brain celsl that makes it able to work :)

 

well i was in Tesco and seen a pc for ÃÆââ¬Å¡Ãâã600. it seemed like a good deal but it did have a printer and now that it is a 2Ghz processor im not even gonna give it a 2nd look

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Its not all about the ghz, you dont need insanely high clock speeds to get performance like Intel has been showing for years.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

With the 3000+, 3200+, ect, what amd have been trying to say is that despite lower clock speeds, you can expect the same performance from a 3000+ athlon as what you would get in a 3ghz pentium 4.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

It might have lower clock speeds, but it can still offer as good or better performance than its Intel equivelant.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

If any of this is wrong, misleading or other what ever, feel free to correct me.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

No your right :)

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

AMD > Intel for gaming also.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

But when did Tescos sell PC's?

But when did Tescos sell PC's?

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Man, the question is, what don't Tesco sell nowadays? :P

They don't sell Thai Brides. :roll: Or Viatnamese Children. *Glares at my IT teacher and Rhys*

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

//Mitch

Never, ever, look at the clock frequency to determine which processor to buy. Always look at benchmarks. The AMD64 series is easily the best bargain at the moment, especially considering you can overclock even a 3000+ to 3800+ levels easily.

I just got an AMD 64 Athlon 3200+ like you're explaining but it was ÃÆââ¬Å¡Ãâã500 from PC World. My friend mentioned that ÃÆââ¬Å¡Ãâã600 one from Tesco and it sounded exactly like the one I bought. Maybe the printer isn't really free. Even though it's only 2GHz I noticed a big difference compared with my old Intel Celeron (2.4GHz). Glad I bought this new PC and I hope it lasts me a long time.

I just got an AMD 64 Athlon 3200+ like you're explaining but it was ÃÆââ¬Å¡Ãâã500 from PC World. My friend mentioned that ÃÆââ¬Å¡Ãâã600 one from Tesco and it sounded exactly like the one I bought. Maybe the printer isn't really free. Even though it's only 2GHz I noticed a big difference compared with my old Intel Celeron (2.4GHz). Glad I bought this new PC and I hope it lasts me a long time.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Ignore the clock speed on the AMD dude ;) it doesn't matter as much.

And if you want to... Clock it, but make sure you got the right heat-sink and CPU cooler.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

yea otherwise this will hapen :roll:

 

 

 

overclocking is dangerous if you don't know what ur doing :!:

 

 

 

 

And if you want to... Clock it, but make sure you got the right heat-sink and CPU cooler.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

yea otherwise this will hapen :roll:

 

 

 

overclocking is dangerous if you don't know what ur doing :!:

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Ok, so the picture is a bit over the top, go for the 64 bit athlon man, for obvisou reasons, 2x more cache, if you over clock, jsut keep the temp nice n low.

 

And if you want to... Clock it, but make sure you got the right heat-sink and CPU cooler.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

yea otherwise this will hapen :roll:

 

 

 

overclocking is dangerous if you don't know what ur doing :!:

 

 

 

[image]

No, it is not possible to set a motherboard on fire with less than two volts of power without putting extreme effort into it. If you gathered all the dust you vacuumed the last year and put it in powersupply unit, and lightning struck nearby, then maybe.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

If you removed the heatsink and modified the BIOS so that it would boot without it, I can see how you could burn the processor. But the motherboard? Hardly.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

And yes, I do realize that the image is probably meant as a joke :P

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

While we're on the topic of overclocking, a good rule of thumb is to test your computer on full load every 50Mhz or so on the AMD64 platform. Even more often as you go over 2.6Ghz. But, as always, the most important rule is to read up on everything related to the platform you are overclocking.

OMG, im feeling really embarrased when your all talking about 2 Ghz and higher while im sitting behind my old 450 Mhz pc from the middle ages....

 

 

 

perhaps i should try to sell mine to a museum.

Lol, that picture is awsome. You could melt a mobo for those who don't believe it. I don' remember where it is but there is a video somewhere online and shows processors without heatsinks/fans. A p3 melts pretty fast. And AMD actually catches fire in a few secs, and a p4 gets really hot. If a processor can catch on fire that fast your mobo could melt. Your mobo would have to be really hot and probably catch on fire for that too happen, but it could happen.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Oh and on-topic don't ever go by clock speed when you're comparing Intel wih AMD. Intel uses 32 bit processors while AMD uses 64 bit processors. A 2 GhZ AMD will definately be faster than an Intel proc. Make sure you look at cache size, front side bus, if it has hyper-transport for AMD/Hyper-threading for Intel among other things.

Lol, that picture is awsome. You could melt a mobo for those who don't believe it. I don' remember where it is but there is a video somewhere online and shows processors without heatsinks/fans. A p3 melts pretty fast. And AMD actually catches fire in a few secs, and a p4 gets really hot. If a processor can catch on fire that fast your mobo could melt. Your mobo would have to be really hot and probably catch on fire for that too happen, but it could happen.

It's not like said movies matter at all, because you do need to put effort into making the computer boot and not shut down without a heatsink. It's not something you do by mistake.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Oh and on-topic don't ever go by clock speed when you're comparing Intel wih AMD. Intel uses 32 bit processors while AMD uses 64 bit processors. A 2 GhZ AMD will definately be faster than an Intel proc. Make sure you look at cache size, front side bus, if it has hyper-transport for AMD/Hyper-threading for Intel among other things.

I agree with the first statement, but I fail to see the point in the rest of the text. There are Intel processors who can handle 64-bit instructions, and there are AMD processors who cannot. There are Intel processors (Pentium M, anyone?) which "do more" per clockcycle than various AMD processors. Looking at HTT and FSB won't get you far, because you cannot really determine how effective various types of processors are compared to each other with these numbers. The only way to measure that, is to use benchmarks. Cache has some influence, but it's also limited. My point is also that you shouldn't judge all Intel products by the NetBurst architecture (which ought to land at least a few Intel-exec's in hell), because they are making some good stuff aswell.