3200+ 400FSB with 1gb RAM vs. 2400+ 266FSB with 768mb RAM...

track... This may be in the order of only about 20% faster for a CPU
50% faster but that's all you can ever expect,, because you have to be
realistic..!!!

An XP3200 is 10% faster in Mhz than an XP2400. 2000Mhz vs. 2200Mhz. This
isn't even arguable...it's just a fact. The fact that it encodes MP3's and
other tasks about 20% faster is partly due to the 200Mhz increase, and the
rest is due to a true FSB increase of 67Mhz (133FSB to 200FSB), and L2
increase of 256K. The T-bred 2400+ is already a very efficient CPU, with 384
K of full speed L1/L2 so it's not overly surprising that the difference is
not huge. I'm surprised that people posting here think that the AMD's
performance rating represents an actual Mhz difference. It's marketing
hype....and in the case of the Barton's labeling it's somewhat inflated.

I run a sim called "Trainz."

When I upgraded from a Tbird 1.4 to an XP2000+, I got exactly the frames per
second increase that the proportional increase from 1400 to 2000 would
suggest.


--
Ed Light

Smiley :-/
MS Smiley :-\

Send spam to the FTC at

Thanks, robots.