If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#1
|
|||
|
|||
FSB vs External CPU clock
I saw lots motherboard BOIS has a line called External CPU clock
what's it's difference between FSB and external CPU clock? in BOIS i usually saw people set FSB=166MHz for AMD motherboard. but i also heard P4 CPU has 400 / 533 / 800 MHz FSB. would that means AMD CPU is much slower than P4's? since AMD only has 166MHz FSB and P4 has aleast 400 FSB. thx |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
actually, no.
the P4 systems that have the 400Mhz.. actually have a 100Mhz FSB. The processor is "quad pumped" so 4 x 100 = 400. 533 is a quad pumped 133, and 800 is a quad pumped 200. with the exception of the 800 Mhz chips.. the 166FSB XP processors (333 FSB, since the AMD chips double the FSB because of the cache's DDR-like characteristics) and even the 133 (266FSB chips) smoke most of the 400 and 533 FSB offerings from intel. But thats just my opinion... at a point, how fast is fast enough? I havent been able to discern significant performance difference in everyday use since the PIII, 133FSB chips came out. If you do some wack stuff with your comp, then you will feel it. NuTs "luk chiu ming" wrote in message ... I saw lots motherboard BOIS has a line called External CPU clock what's it's difference between FSB and external CPU clock? in BOIS i usually saw people set FSB=166MHz for AMD motherboard. but i also heard P4 CPU has 400 / 533 / 800 MHz FSB. would that means AMD CPU is much slower than P4's? since AMD only has 166MHz FSB and P4 has aleast 400 FSB. thx |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
On Fri, 22 Aug 2003 00:12:19 -0500, "NuT CrAcKeR"
wrote: with the exception of the 800 Mhz chips.. the 166FSB XP processors (333 FSB, since the AMD chips double the FSB because of the cache's DDR-like characteristics) and even the 133 (266FSB chips) smoke most of the 400 and 533 FSB offerings from intel. The AMD chips also 'smoke' (litterally) better than the Intel offerings! They run hotter, draw more current and produce more heat than the Intel offerings. Ever watch "TechTV"? Patrick Norton, Yoshi and the gang have probably burned up more AMD chips than the normal person would in a lifetime ... all in doing O'Clocking tests, etc. Sometimes the AMD chips met their death merely because the heat sink was improperly seated. (Intel chips generally just "shut down", and save themselves). Finally, IMHO, Intel chipset based MBs are FAR more stable than those with VIA, SIS, Apollo (or whatever) chipsets. After browsing various MB newsgroups for years, reading the complaints about one thing or another, most of the "problems" are with MBs running AMD processors with VIA, SIS, etc chipsets. Yeah, they are cheaper, and if you are lucky, you may even get one to run stable and not crash (giving you reasons to 'blame' Microsoft or whoever for producing crappy software). It all comes down to "you get what you pay for". I built plenty of AMD systems back in the 386/486 days, even with their K5 / K6 series. But, they've just not kept up with Intel, IMHO. As always, YMMV. "Mirab, with sails unfurled ..." (ps ... I do not own any Intel stock, nor do I work for them. I'm an independent computer analyst.) |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
"Darmok" wrote in message ... On Fri, 22 Aug 2003 00:12:19 -0500, "NuT CrAcKeR" wrote: with the exception of the 800 Mhz chips.. the 166FSB XP processors (333 FSB, since the AMD chips double the FSB because of the cache's DDR-like characteristics) and even the 133 (266FSB chips) smoke most of the 400 and 533 FSB offerings from intel. The AMD chips also 'smoke' (litterally) better than the Intel offerings! They run hotter, draw more current and produce more heat than the Intel offerings. Ever watch "TechTV"? Patrick Norton, Yoshi and the gang have probably burned up more AMD chips than the normal person would in a lifetime ... all in doing O'Clocking tests, etc. Sometimes the AMD chips met their death merely because the heat sink was improperly seated. (Intel chips generally just "shut down", and save themselves). Finally, IMHO, Intel chipset based MBs are FAR more stable than those with VIA, SIS, Apollo (or whatever) chipsets. After browsing various MB newsgroups for years, reading the complaints about one thing or another, most of the "problems" are with MBs running AMD processors with VIA, SIS, etc chipsets. Yeah, they are cheaper, and if you are lucky, you may even get one to run stable and not crash (giving you reasons to 'blame' Microsoft or whoever for producing crappy software). It all comes down to "you get what you pay for". I built plenty of AMD systems back in the 386/486 days, even with their K5 / K6 series. But, they've just not kept up with Intel, IMHO. As always, YMMV. "Mirab, with sails unfurled ..." (ps ... I do not own any Intel stock, nor do I work for them. I'm an independent computer analyst.) Although you make some valid observations, your post smacks of bias against AMD. The fact is that typical AMD users are far more likely to be enthuiasists whereas the typical Intel user knows nothing about computers, doesn't care and just wants a box that works. Obviously you will see more problem related posts from AMD users as they're all trying to extract the most from their PC and cause themselves grief in the process through overclocking their CPUs, PCI buses and RAM. I've built many Intel and AMD based systems over the last few years and they've both had their share of problems. |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
On the brink of madness... | I.C. Koets | General | 18 | January 31st 05 10:49 PM |
Asus A7N8X-X and AMD Athlon XP 3200+ | Information Scavenger | Asus Motherboards | 30 | November 9th 04 09:30 PM |
A7V333 cannot keep acurate time | Mark | Asus Motherboards | 2 | November 3rd 04 03:39 AM |
Updrade PC | Guy Smith | General | 22 | August 15th 04 01:57 AM |
ECS Pathetic Technical Support | Pedro Corbett | General | 14 | July 29th 04 03:53 AM |