XP versus MP

[Spike]

It's widely known that an Athlon XP processor is about half the price of an Athlon MP processor. I recently read from a computer magazine that an XP simply won't work in a multi-processor board, and furthermore that the only difference between the MP and the XP is that the L1 bridge on the XP is severed whereas it isn't severed on the XP.

How the heck can AMD get away with that? I love AMD. Far cheaper than Intel, and every advance Intel makes, AMD seem to be there to go one better, but surely, If all you have to do is reconnect the L1 bridge, who's going to buy an Athlon MP, andhow can they justify twice the price for it?

 

[Nodsu]

Go ahead and reconnect it then.. see how well it works out. I have understood that it works only sometimes.

And it's not only AMD who is selling basically the same product under different names with huge price differences.

It also very likely that the MP series Athlons are much better quality than XPs since MP line goes into workstations and servers where reliability is the key.

 

[Spike]

Thanks for that. It would seem I may have been misinformed on that one then. It was my understanding from what I read that the disconnection of the L1 bridge was the only difference between the two.

 

[somekid007]

i believe it is the last pair of pins on the l5 bridge, so check before you connect

 

[Steg]

aparetly all MPs of the same speed (all 2000+, all 2400+ etc) are all INDENTICAL so there are no discrepencies within the multiprocessing environement whereas the XPs are all built quicker and cheaper where accuracy (to a certain degree) doesnt affect the stability of the system.

Steg