I suggest going 1600+, as well, provided you get the right stepping.
Let me show you why:
"Yeah no kidding! I had an incident (ie: being a dumbass) with my AGKGA 1600+ so I ordered another one from Newegg to replace it. Got an AGOIA Y 0213 and it did 1811 on stock voltage! I almost crapped myself! Now it's purring along at 1930! I didn't order it becuase of the stepping, it was actually before this thread was even start"
Look in various AMD forums and you'll see reports similar to that one above (not mine). Amdmb, for one. There are dozens and dozens of reports of these CPUs (1600+'s) hitting *at least* 166 times their multiplier (10.5), which gives you 2100+ speed. And they are trying to get rid of them everywhere, so they're 55 bucks in most places.
If you're going to have a board capable of 333 fsb and memory capable of running it at good CAS levels, then I don't see why one would get the higher rated 2000 or 2100 when the 1600 can do it for you for half the money.
Of course, you have to find the right stepping. AGOIA or AROIA. And the next line should start with a Y. Those CPUs are based on the stepping that the 2000+ and 2100+ were based on and so that is typically their rated speed.
Just food for thought. The real question for me isn't whether to get a Palomino higher than 1600, but whether I should wait for a 2400+ to overclock (which is based on the revised T-bred core and should be an even better overclocker) or go with this 55 buck (1/3rd the price before that other CPU even launches) CPU. I remain undecided.