SUPER HOT !!!! "xp 2100+" xp1600+ for $51 from newegg. It's crazy !!!!!!!

[stevejst]

2. Just take the inventory on hand and mark them according to demand.

That is of course bogus. Assuming that CPU can be easily rebadged but apparently not, it has to be remanufactured, no? For the revenue increase of what? $30 per CPU? How much would that rebadging cost?
And why don't you find any proof of that claim? You are outright claiming that AMD deceives customers. Where is the proof for that, I am sure that XP 1900 buyers should feel cheated if that is the case.

This is the first intellegent thing you've said in the entire thread.

So why are you making so much effort to assault my posts and insult me? Of course I can see you have been doing that in the past to others so I am not taking it personally.
But you could use a little more civility, for spewing foam doesn't make you any more believable.

 

[natopotato2]

Originally posted by: stevejst

2. Just take the inventory on hand and mark them according to demand.

That is of course bogus. Assuming that CPU can be easily rebadged but apparently not, it has to be remanufactured, no? For the revenue increase of what? $30 per CPU? How much would that rebadging cost?
And why don't you find any proof of that claim? You are outright claiming that AMD deceives customers. Where is the proof for that, I am sure that XP 1900 buyers should feel cheated if that is the case.

how is AMD deceiving customers by selling them a chip that runs at the speed it is specified to? the 1900+ buyers, they knew what they were getting and they got it, they recieved a 1.6 GHz athlon XP. AMD does NOT condone OCing(at least not publicly) and therefore, makes no garuntees or statments to suggest that a particular chip/stepping will or will not overclock higher than another.

 

[stevejst]

Natpotato, AMD would be deceiving Athlon XP 1900 buyers in that case, for they would be buying overpriced/overclocked XP 1600, if you look relative from XP 1600 perspective, try from XP 1900 perspective.

But any of you who is making this rebadging argument, would you come up with any proof of that?
All I see from you is what amounts to a speculation.
I am outright asking you to show the proof of that, if you have any.

That sounds obviously as a deceptive AMD practice, why don't you explain how do you know that?

And how about that overclocking database I mentioned number of times, why is that not present and obvious there?
I think at least for me that is the main reason why it is hard to believe your "rebadging" claim, but if you can show some proof of that I believe many people would feel very interested in examining it.

 

[natopotato2]

steve, i'm not sure if you're seeing my arguement. i'm saying that as long as a chip runs at the specified speed, at the specified voltage then i'd say there is nothing deceptive about that. also, it is to my knowledge that demand is higher for the lower end chips, so a 1600+ getting "rebadged" so to speak, as a 1900+ is unlikely.


edit: i think i see what you are getting at better now. i think what is confusing is how the manufacturing/binning process works. While i have no solid/official proof, i would think that AMD does not set the multiplier on a chip(or batch of chips) until it is ready to ship out. so even if the chip(s) where binned as 1900+ they might be set to 1600+ to satisfy market demand. it might even be possible that AMD doesn't even bin chips into the lower speed grades(ie: 1500+ or 1600+) and instead uses higher binned chips set at the lower multi. the prices could certainly be taken reflect such yields. i HIGHLY DOUBT that AMD sets chips that are binned lower to higher speeds.

 

[stevejst]

Well, my point is very consistent throughout this thread and that is that I do not see any reason to believe that slower labeled AMD CPU of Palomino core would be faster or equal to a faster clock labeled AMD Palomino CPU.

I believe there are individual differences and that perhaps newer steppings (Agoia, Agoga, Agkga ... whatever) are better or less buggy than older, though that is all more of a guessing at least as far as I am concerned.
Frankly before today I didn't pay attention on that OC database but it actually pretty much confirms what I believe, except that I am not buying average overclocking as stated there without a cup of salt.

About AMD relabeling that is the first time I heard though there are claims on the few web sites about the same quality of Agoga XP 1900 and Agoga XP 2100, also without any shred of evidence. I would be certainly interested if something like relabeling is going on for it would be pretty much grounds for a class action lawsuit against AMD.

 

[gonzo2k]

I am 43, thanks. 18-26 is not far out, the middle of that 52.5% still falls at 22 which is the age of adolescence, 19-23 as far as I know psychology. So my guess is not far out.

I'm older and could only browse the impending argument (believe me- I didn't read-only skimmed)

How much older, you may wonder?

THIS WHOLE DISCUSSION IS FAR OUT!!!

Peace.

 

[stevejst]

Gonzo, if it makes you feel any better, I am not feeling old at all.

 

[natopotato2]

Originally posted by: stevejst
Well, my point is very consistent throughout this thread and that is that I do not see any reason to believe that slower labeled AMD CPU of Palomino core would be faster or equal to a faster clock labeled AMD Palomino CPU.

I believe there are individual differences and that perhaps newer steppings (Agoia, Agoga, Agkga ... whatever) are better or less buggy than older, though that is all more of a guessing at least as far as I am concerned.
Frankly before today I didn't pay attention on that OC database but it actually pretty much confirms what I believe, except that I am not buying average overclocking as stated there without a cup of salt.

About AMD relabeling that is the first time I heard though there are claims on the few web sites about the same quality of Agoga XP 1900 and Agoga XP 2100, also without any shred of evidence. I would be certainly interested if something like relabeling is going on for it would be pretty much grounds for a class action lawsuit against AMD.

2 things steve:

1st off, your comment "I do not see any reason to believe that slower labeled AMD CPU of Palomino core would be faster or equal to a faster clock labeled AMD Palomino CPU." i think shows that you are pretty inexperienced in the "overclocking arts" if you will. in general, as a core and it's manufacturing processes become mature and refined, stepping becomes more important than the stock speed rating. early in the paly's "life" i'd agree with your arguement, but not at the stage it's at now.

2nd, how/why would relabeling be grounds for a lawsuit? what is wrong with the concept?


i'm not going to knock your opinions of the OC "database" i don't take it too seriously myself. there is no way to verify any of the reports. i use the ORB on madonion instead to determine what sort of speeds chips are hitting, then look at the OC "database" for the steppings to watch.

 

[stevejst]

2nd, how/why would relabeling be grounds for a lawsuit? what is wrong with the concept?

From California Consumer Legal Remedies Act this is considered deceptive:

The law prohibits unfair and deceptive practices, including false advertising, misrepresenting the type or quality of products for sale, and even doctors or lawyers representing themselves as having special qualifications they don't have.

Misrepresenting the type of quality of product.
That is grounds for legal action, I am sure AMD lawyers know that.
I am sure XP 1900 users would like to know that something like relabeling has taken place while they were left with buying a product that is otherwise misrepresented of better quality that XP of rating less than 1900.
If you have bought XP 1900 in the past month and then learned that is just the same quality product as the one labeled XP 1600 while it costed $30-50 more, I think you would not feel happy about that. I am pretty much sure that AMD would be very much aware of the consequences.

 

[natopotato2]

but the rating IS justified. it does run at 1.6ghz. that is all AMD said it would run at. the 1600+ is no different, AMD specs it to run at 1.4ghz nothing more. if the 1600+ OC's better than the 1900+ AMD is not deciving anyone to the scale of a lawsuit. AMD makes no promises about any stepping or chip other than it will run at stock speed at stock voltage with stock cooling or equililent.

steve, you do know that AMD does NOT have separate production lines for different ratings right?(well if you didn't now you do). AMD makes the best batch of chips it can each time. generally, all the chips in a batch will be ABLE to run at similar speeds.

but what it's ABLE to do does NOT equal what it is rated to do.

 

[stevejst]

all the chips in a batch will be ABLE to run at similar speeds

Nope, I have no reason to believe that. In fact if you look at the particular stepping - AGKGA stepping in that database I mentioned many times - it is exactly opposite. Higher clock, better overclocking, as one would expect. Though, of course, I am not inspecting their production lines.

In fact the argument that a manufacturer would relabel a product to sell it $30-50 cheaper seems irrational to me, why not just drop the price $30-50 and sell existing inventory. Moreover AMD is just doing that obviously while I see no compelling evidence of the first "alternative."

 

[HKS]

I've been reading some of these posts, and I'm wondering why this thread is so long, when it's clear that most of the discussion has lost relevance. To sum up the points I've heard...

Steve:
I think overclocking the 1600 is dumb, because there are a lot of other parts that you need to buy. Blah blah blah, blah blah blah.

Other people:
We overclock without buying all those high cost parts, and feel the 1600XP is the best bang for the buck. Blah blah blah blah blah.

Steve:
You're lying... and a teenager. Blah blah blah blah blah blah.

Other people:
YOU'RE lying -- I'm not a teenager, I'm old, and you're stupid.

Me:
Steve, go away. This deal is clearly not for you... if you feel that it doesn't work for whatever reasons, then that's your own opinion. Everyone else feels that it works because it has for them. There are a variety of components they may have used (personally, I have a 1700XP o/c to almost 2000XP (1.65Ghz) with a K7S5a motherboard, using only FSB o/c. I don't have any special fans really, only a coolermaster, and I run rock solid under 3dmark, SisSoft Sandra, and extensive CAD rendering in the deathly heat of Michigan. (around 56 degrees under load) That might be high to you, but I don't care... it's solid, so I don't complain. At any rate, this isn't a belligerent post, I'm sure you have reasons for not wanting to overclock, and they maybe completely valid to you. Everyone, and I do mean EVERYONE... has had the chance to hear what you're saying, and it's been noted... so now, your disappearance in this thread would be appreciated. Thank you, and have a good night. =)

 

[garyboz]

natopotato2, thanks for the compliment. I wouldn't post again except I see you are getting sucked in by the troll.

Steve has 20+ posts since TODAY in just this thread. Just since 2:30PM. That's over 2 an hour for the last 10 hours straight. He's just sitting at his computer hitting refresh over and over again waiting to see if someone replied to his nonsense. He's obviously bored and has nothing better to do. It's pretty sad really.

"That is of course bogus. Assuming that CPU can be easily rebadged but apparently not, it has to be remanufactured, no? For the revenue increase of what? $30 per CPU? How much would that rebadging cost?"

I cannot help you with this. Please show my post above to any accountant type person you know. Perhaps they will be able to explain it to you.

"And why don't you find any proof of that claim? You are outright claiming that AMD deceives customers."

I said nothing of the sort. I said that CPU makers sometimes sell higher rated chips as lower rated chips.

"Where is the proof for that, I am sure that XP 1900 buyers should feel cheated if that is the case."

Why would they feel cheated? They have a processor that is guaranteed to run at XP 1900 speeds. That's what they bought.

"natopotato2, AMD would be deceiving Athlon XP 1900 buyers in that case, for they would be buying overpriced/overclocked XP 1600, if you look relative from XP 1600 perspective, try from XP 1900 perspective."

AMD DOES NOT SELL 1600's as 1900's. There are occasions where they will sell higher rated chips as lower rated chips.

"But any of you who is making this rebadging argument, would you come up with any proof of that?
All I see from you is what amounts to a speculation." "I am outright asking you to show the proof of that, if you have any. "

It's a trade secret. I cannot reveal my sources. If you don't believe me I don't care. But I'm sure you could find similar information if you did a google search.

"Misrepresenting the type of quality of product.
That is grounds for legal action, I am sure AMD lawyers know that."

Please talk to a lawyer about wanting to sue AMD for selling you an XP 1900 that actually performs at XP 1900 speeds. I'm sure they'll take your case right away. They may make you leave a deposit for their services though...

 

[stevejst]

HKS, you are making reference about me, misrepresenting my posts, and expect I would not respond?

Here are the claims I see made in this thread that I did argue against, this is without trying to be funny:

1. XP 1700 or XP 1800 cannot be overclocked better than XP 1600 Agoia or as good as XP 1600 Agoia.

2. XP 1700, XP 1800, XP 1900 are all inferior in overclocking to Agoia XP 1600 because of some ceiling they hit.

3. It is better to buy Agoia 1600 than any XP 1800 because of that.

4. You can overclock 400 MHz just by jacking up FSB with $6 cooler.

5. AMD sells lower clock CPUs that are just rebadged/relabeled/"remultiplied" higher clock CPUs.

6. Undocumented overclocking claims are serious reference ones takes at the face value.

That is what is this about.
I respond every time somebody refers to my post, it doesn't bother me, I can do that in a civil manner with rational arguments.
Unlike mister "Garyboz" who sees all the things in me that he cannot realize about himself.
"Boz," whenever you spice up your arguments with insults that is the best sign how good those arguments are.
Perhaps this is too much of a debate with me on one side and all the would-be overclockers on another, I can grant you that.

 

[DEFIANT1]

a few comments to add to the mix:


1) Where's the Hot Deal? Oh yeah, I see it.....about 7 pages ago, before the trolling began!

2) HKS & Natopotato......You da MAN!

3) Steve....Why are you not getting the feeling that your posts are not fully appreciated or needed here?

4) My 1800+ OC's rock stable at 1700mhz+ with stock cooling (I.e, Coolermaster), and close to 1800Mhz using an Alpha 8045. Oh, Yeah....one more thing: I'm not a teenager.

5) Thanks to the originator of this thread, I've just purchased a shiny, new 1600+ to throw into a spare box..... Hopefully, it'll keep the kids off mine!

 

[stevejst]

DEFIANT1,
You are refuting the others in what you are saying.

Your post is full of inconsistencies:

1. You don't see a good deal any more? Well check the pricewatch prices of XP 1700 is $66, XP 1600 is $65, even XP 1800 is $80.
Perhaps not Agoia, maybe Agkga, or Agoga, or Aroya would that be so much worse? Check the database offered in the thread. Anyway, newegg has that miraculous Agoia XP 1600 for $68, grab it, it is $10 cheaper than XP 1700 there.

2. You claim to be able to go to 1.8 Ghz with your XP 1800 so what do you expect from XP 1600? BTW, the guys here claimed you cannot do that with XP 1800, did you miss that? I thought you agreed with them, not me?

3. You put it in a spare box? Well, the "point" of this deal was to replace XP 1800, no?

If you don't want me responding to your posts, then do not refer to my posts. The reason why you are doing so repeatedly is because you are unable to defend your own inconsistent posts.

About the age, who knows, for all I know you could be a 12-year old, if only I would judge that based on your sig.

 

[DEFIANT1]

Originally posted by: stevejst
DEFIANT1,
You are refuting the others in what you are saying.

Your post is full of inconsistencies:

1. You don't see a good deal any more? Well check the pricewatch prices of XP 1700 is $66, XP 1600 is $65, even XP 1800 is $80.
Perhaps not Agoia, maybe Agkga, or Agoga, or Aroya would that be so much worse? Check the database offered in the thread. Anyway, newegg has that miraculous Agoia XP 1600 for $68, grab it, it is $10 cheaper than XP 1700 there.

As stated previously.....I am getting it from Newegg. I can pretty much guarantee that I won't get ripped off by them; not so with PW vendors, as others have stated so plainly, yet you seem to want to continue to ignore:disgust:

2. You claim to be able to go to 1.8 Ghz with your XP 1800 so what do you expect from XP 1600? BTW, the guys here claimed you cannot do that with XP 1800, did you miss that? I thought you agreed with them, not me?

What I expect from the 1600+ is a good value for my money, with decent overclocking potential; just like everybody else who might buy based upon this thread's info. I'd love to have you here in front of my desk, so that you could watch the screen POST as "Athlon XP 2200+", I think that'd be the only way to convince you or anyone else that it CAN be done.

3. You put it in a spare box? Well, the "point" of this deal was to replace XP 1800, no?

NO....The point of this deal was to make people aware of a great bargain potential...Something that you seemed to have missed in your misguided attempts to refute other people's opinions for whatever personal satisfaction it may give you.

If you don't want me responding to your posts, then do not refer to my posts.

Oh puhleeze! You honestly believe that I or anybody else here, for that matter, feels threatened by your lame-assed trolling? Get a life of your own.

The reason why you are doing so repeatedly is because you are unable to defend your own inconsistent posts.

Repeatedly? This makes a total of 2 posts on the topic.....which I might add, you've managed to sway so far off from the thread originator's original, that this no longer qualifies as a hot deal, and IMHO should be locked. Thanks a lot, it's appreciated! (not)

About the age, who knows, for all I know you could be a 12-year old, if only I would judge that based on your sig.

Any other pearls of wisdom? Shoot, I guess I'll have to adjust my sig based upon your comments. Would somethng like stevejst suffers from rectal-cranial inversion in the sig be more to your liking?

Anyhoo...I think at this point, I've had enough of troll-baiting....I've caught my limit, and the rest are too small to keep

Have a nice day

 

[stevejst]

I am getting it from Newegg. I can pretty much guarantee that I won't get ripped off by them; not so with PW vendors, as others have stated so plainly, yet you seem to want to continue to ignore.

How much do you know about deals?
I can help you here.
Usually the lowest prices on pricewatch for AMD CPUs are by Thompson Computer. They are very much reliable, cheaper than newegg, package better, and have 3-day shipping. The prices I mentioned are theirs. In fact they are the ones that are driving pricewatch prices, not newegg. If you didn't know that, you should be thankful for this info for I assume many of the guys here knew that already.

The rest of your post speaks for itself.

 

[ShinSa]

stevejst, arent you the same guy who said GC68 wasn't a good enough heatsink just becuase it's so cheap, costing just 7 bux???

Haven't you made a fool of your self already??

Why do you bother keep picking fights with people when everyone is agasint you???

Do you argue with people like this at your school also??

 

[railer]

This chip is $65 shipped at TCWO, I paid $66 shipped last week from Newegg.
I was reasonably certain of getting an AGOIA stepping chip, based upon what others had gotten from the same vendor. The AGOIA stepping is, in fact, what I got. I wouldn't even care to guess what stepping I might get from TCWO, although it could also be AGOIA.
I am running it as I type this, at 166 mhz fsb, at .25v over stock, on an old celeron cooler that I had laying around. Read: Free.
Those are the facts ladies. Anyone who doesn't like it....tough. I'm not sure what the point of all this nonsense is. Some of you people sound like 12 year old egomaniacs with a touch of bi-polar disorder. Well, one of you does anyway. If you don't like the deal, just move along. It really is that simple. I will not be hitting the refresh button every 5 minutes for the next 7 days waiting for a response. I have a life.

 

[stevejst]

Why do you bother ...

Why not Shinsa?
These are all ad hominem references, would you mind? After that your opinions about me are irrelevant to me anyway.
GC68 was claimed to cost $6 not $7, and it is $6 at SVC. True, I do claim that it cannot cool 400 Mhz AMD XP overclocking in a satisfactory fashion. Not with 32 CFM fan it has under that $6 price. It seems to me that was obvious since none of you came with any documented proof of that, right? Are you able to do so? Btw, at the top of this page you have the proof of the opposite, a guy whose CPU is running 57C with this cooler after 17 Mhz FSB increase.

For there are countless of web sites where people evaluate coolers in some more verifiable fashion, and I see nobody to come up with that kind of outlandish claim anywhere.
I wonder what is the point of SVC rating it only to XP 1800. Do you want to claim that XP 1600 running at 1.8 Ghz is cooler than XP 1900 running default? Who's going to believe that without some evidence?
If you want no debate with me, don't address me, it is that simple. It looks retarded, excuse moi, to address somebody, ask questions, and expect the person not to respond.

 

[RobsTV]

Originally posted by: ColinS

Unlocking the AthlonXP 2100+ by turning it into XP1600+
Seems like the SVG/Newegg conspiracy continues.
And to make matters worse, then don't use modern motherboards. Cheap Old 8kha+ is board of choice.

I'm not a regular at this forum obviously... I wrote that article and I just want to defend my decision to use the 8KHA+...

It was the best board out there at the time the article was written, KT333 based boards weren't available then.

As for overclocking CPU's, steppings do count my 2 AGOIA (XP1600+ and XP1700+) both do about 1.85 GHz-1.9 GHz on the 8K3A+ with a voltage of 1.85V on air cooling (SK-6 w/40 CFM YS Tech).

Thanks for the great article.
I was actually using a lot of sarcasm when I stated the above. Of course there is no conspiracy.
It was only meant to prove that you don't need state of the art, high dollar equipment, to overclock AMD's.
I've used an 8kha+ for months, and recently tested a 8k3a, hoping it would replace the 8kha+
My tests showed the 8kha+ was actually faster at the vcore and fsb I like to run at (166MHz - 171 MHz).
So I kept the 8kha+ and dumped the 8k3a. Will wait for next chipset before upgrading. Perhaps KT400?

Originally posted by: stevejst
RobTV, I have nowhere insulted anybody in this whole thread, check it out.

Huh? You have repeatedly and personally insulted the vast majority of posters to this thread by basically calling all of us a bunch of liars.

I live in Tampa area, not far from TCWO.
If I order by 4pm, I get item the next day, and when I mention Newegg, they ship it too me for free.
Yes, they have great prices, and great service, and should be part of everyones distributors.
But, this deal shows that Newegg has the XP's we all want, so I shop there for the XP1600+.
If TCWO had the good cores, I would buy from them. They might, don't know.

 

[stevejst]

Huh? You have repeatedly and personally insulted the vast majority of posters to this thread by basically calling all of us a bunch of liars.

Exaggerations. That is the weak point of many here and that is why so much anger from you guys.
I stayed around to hear it but there are many that just don't read any more and think the same.
Exactly exaggerations. They start that way, and when you make the opposite argument then they change another way, when you agree, they tend to get worse. I think there is a plenty of evidence in this thread about that.

TCWO don't have good cores? What cores they have, do you know by chance? How much you can overclock their say XP 1800?
Did you try?
Just asking. I mean in your database there are all sorts of cores that seem to be good. None of that in TCWO?

And don't get irritated, we are keeping a deal thread alive, newegg still has the miracle of Agoia XP 1600 for $68.
Just trying to make sure everybody gets it.

 

[BigJ]

Anyone had enough of all this? The deal is lost and the trolling is rampant (by 1 person). I think it's about time for a lock, which is what Steve was going for in the first place, seeing as he's obviously a disliker of overclocking in general and knows really nothing about it.

 

[davidos]

umm...............................

I am running my AGOIA (newegg) 1600+ at 1740Ghz (12 x 144) right now on a Shuttle AK31 v3.1 motherboard. I unlocked the chip using the unlocking kit from highspeedpc.

My temps are 51c and 31c right now as I am typing this. I have a Antec 303xp 300w power supply and I have to reboot once from a cold boot crash whenever I startup in the morning then I am good to go..... Could that be solved by a bigger power supply?

My case is pretty weak in terms of ventilation since I am using a cheapo Antec "desktop" case (for space reasons). I have one 80mm fan for intake in front and 2 60mm (low noise/output) fans in back along with the power supply fan. My Geforce4 also puts out a lot of heat......

I plan on buying a KT400 motherboard whenever they come out and upgrading the power supply if necessary. My +3.3v is at 3.3, my +5 is at 4.95 and my +12 is at 12.10......... those numbers look fine but do I need a bigger psu for more combined watts????