Summary and Conclusion
We have seen throughout our testing that were the enhanced level 2 cache is utilised the XP3000+ does indeed warrant its performance rating. The XP2800 despite running at a faster true speed is beaten by the XP3000+ in all of the real applications we tested, only losing out in the theoretical tests. When the XP3000+ is run at the same speed as the XP2800 the Barton core wins or is equal across the board. Although the performance gains are not a big as was hopped, the XP3000+ continues to improve on the Athlon’s performance.
It is difficult to say if the increase in performance of the XP3000+ is enough to warrant changing an XP2800, but as the XP2800 has not hit the retail shelves yet it’s not really a question many of us will be asking. Upgrading from an XP2400 or XP2600 should yield a decent performance return for your investment though.
The biggest challenge faced by the Barton is its performance against arch rivals Intel and their flagship the P4 3.06. Intel have added ‘Hyper-Threading’ to further enhance performance in the 3.06, but even so in most games the XP2800 was more than a match for the Pentium. The XP3000+ seems to move AMD into a bigger performance lead in these arenas. Despite the P4’s ability to produce very high results in the theoretical tests it does not seem able to turn that performance into useable power and well as the XP3000+.
Without wishing to lessen the performance achievements of the new Barton core we should remember that the Pentium can benefit from its ability to overclock and in general this can bridge the Intel / AMD performance gap. However if you are looking for the fastest processor at it’s stock speed the XP3000+ will certainly fit the bill. Hopefully we will look at overclocking in more depth in a future review.
Pros
Very fast processor for gaming
Should be cheaper than the Pentium 4 3.06
Enables running at high front side bus speeds
Cons
Same AMD fragile die with high risk of damage
Thanks to Theresa at AMD.
