Performance Acceleration Technology (P.A.T)

Woger MKII @wogerbox.co.nz wrote in message
...
On Tue, 03 Feb 2004 15:58:37 GMT, "Skid" wrote:


Woger MKII @wogerbox.co.nz wrote in message
.. .
May be if its a Abit but Asus and Gigabyte do not let you go over
210Mhz
FSB..

First you say it's an Intel standard, now you say some boardmakers do and
some don't. It's still not true.

There are any number of websites that have reviewed Canterwood boards
with
PAT working well beyond 210 mhz. Mine does, Tom's does, and a lot of
other
people will tell you the same.

At this point, you're the only person claiming otherwise, and you have
offered no source or confirmation.




Read the info that has been posted on the Gigabyte and Asus new groups,
but it
not my fault if you can't read..

The Asus boards have to use a Patched Bios to go over 210 fsb..

It's not my reading comprehension that needs work, it's your memory.You
said:

"PAT gets disabled if the FSB clock is over 210mhz, and that is a Intel
Standard."

Not true. When evidence to the contrary was provided, you backed down and
said:

"May be if its a Abit but Asus and Gigabyte do not let you go over 210Mhz
FSB."

Not true. When evidence to the contrary was provided, you backed down and
said:

"The Asus boards have to use a Patched Bios to go over 210 fsb."

Now you're getting closer to the truth. Your original blanket statement, of
which you were "200 percent sure," was 100 percent false.

could that be when NB is 800/400 as opposed to FSB? because I'm telling you
that with NB at 800 and FSB at 244, PAT is enabled on my system.

--

Thomas Geery
Network+ certified

ftp://geerynet.d2g.com
ftp://68.98.180.8 Abit Mirror ----- Cable modem IP
This IP is dynamic so it *could* change!...
over 120,000 FTP users served!
^^^^^^^




Woger MKII @wogerbox.co.nz wrote in message
...
On Tue, 03 Feb 2004 22:56:31 GMT, "Skid" wrote:


Woger MKII @wogerbox.co.nz wrote in message
.. .
On Tue, 03 Feb 2004 15:58:37 GMT, "Skid"
wrote:


Woger MKII @wogerbox.co.nz wrote in message
.. .
May be if its a Abit but Asus and Gigabyte do not let you go over
210Mhz
FSB..

First you say it's an Intel standard, now you say some boardmakers do
and
some don't. It's still not true.

There are any number of websites that have reviewed Canterwood boards
with
PAT working well beyond 210 mhz. Mine does, Tom's does, and a lot of
other
people will tell you the same.

At this point, you're the only person claiming otherwise, and you have
offered no source or confirmation.




Read the info that has been posted on the Gigabyte and Asus new groups,
but it
not my fault if you can't read..

The Asus boards have to use a Patched Bios to go over 210 fsb..

It's not my reading comprehension that needs work, it's your memory.You
said:

"PAT gets disabled if the FSB clock is over 210mhz, and that is a Intel
Standard."

Not true. When evidence to the contrary was provided, you backed down and
said:

"May be if its a Abit but Asus and Gigabyte do not let you go over 210Mhz
FSB."

Not true. When evidence to the contrary was provided, you backed down and
said:

"The Asus boards have to use a Patched Bios to go over 210 fsb."

Now you're getting closer to the truth. Your original blanket statement,
of
which you were "200 percent sure," was 100 percent false.




I have Dnloaded the 875P Data sheets, PAT is Only used when FSB is
800/400
so its a Intel restriction..

I rest my case..

Intel also doesn't mention PAT working at 5:4 cpu:ram ratio -- but it does.

Intel also says PAT doesn't work on the 865, but it does.

Intel doesn't support overclocking, so anything beyond 200fsb doesn't exist
in their official documents. That shouldn't surprise anyone, and it
certainly doesn't mean that PAT doesn't work beyond 200 (or 210) fsb -- we
have personal experience and plenty of independent confirmation from a
variety of sources.

Woger has rested his case, but the evidence is purely circumstantial,
rebuttal witnesses have established reasonable doubt, and the jury is still
out.

"TomG" wrote in message
news:_1qUb.2419$Yj.288@lakeread02...
could that be when NB is 800/400 as opposed to FSB? because I'm telling
you
that with NB at 800 and FSB at 244, PAT is enabled on my system.

--

Thomas Geery
Network+ certified

ftp://geerynet.d2g.com
ftp://68.98.180.8 Abit Mirror ----- Cable modem IP
This IP is dynamic so it *could* change!...
over 120,000 FTP users served!
^^^^^^^




Woger MKII @wogerbox.co.nz wrote in message
...
On Tue, 03 Feb 2004 22:56:31 GMT, "Skid"
wrote:


Woger MKII @wogerbox.co.nz wrote in message
.. .
On Tue, 03 Feb 2004 15:58:37 GMT, "Skid"
wrote:


Woger MKII @wogerbox.co.nz wrote in message
.. .
May be if its a Abit but Asus and Gigabyte do not let you go over
210Mhz
FSB..

First you say it's an Intel standard, now you say some boardmakers
do
and
some don't. It's still not true.

There are any number of websites that have reviewed Canterwood
boards
with
PAT working well beyond 210 mhz. Mine does, Tom's does, and a lot of
other
people will tell you the same.

At this point, you're the only person claiming otherwise, and you
have
offered no source or confirmation.




Read the info that has been posted on the Gigabyte and Asus new
groups,
but it
not my fault if you can't read..

The Asus boards have to use a Patched Bios to go over 210 fsb..

It's not my reading comprehension that needs work, it's your memory.You
said:

"PAT gets disabled if the FSB clock is over 210mhz, and that is a Intel
Standard."

Not true. When evidence to the contrary was provided, you backed down
and
said:

"May be if its a Abit but Asus and Gigabyte do not let you go over
210Mhz
FSB."

Not true. When evidence to the contrary was provided, you backed down
and
said:

"The Asus boards have to use a Patched Bios to go over 210 fsb."

Now you're getting closer to the truth. Your original blanket
statement,
of
which you were "200 percent sure," was 100 percent false.




I have Dnloaded the 875P Data sheets, PAT is Only used when FSB is
800/400
so its a Intel restriction..

I rest my case..

Woger MKII wrote
May be Abit is not playing Intel Rules..



I'm not sure if this post came through before, so I repeat it. ABIT and
ASUS found a way to *trick*( the INTEL chipset. . .


"Wayne Youngman" wrote
Hi,

just read this, what do you make of it?

X-bit labs
Review of ASUS P4P800 Mainboard on i865PE Chipset (page 7)

snip
"Having taken a really in-depth look at PAT technology, we arrived at a
very
curious conclusion: there is no PAT at all!"

http://tinyurl.com/2aw3l
--
Wayne ][
new specs coming soon!

Woger MKII @wogerbox.co.nz wrote in message
I am refering to the Real 875...


Hehe I take it you *didn't read it then :P (looks like they are both the
same thing). So you think the 865 and 875 are different then. . . .hmmm

You think that air your breathing now?

Like I said. . .there is no spoon! (INTEL perform a hardware cripple on the
Canterwood to make Springdale).
--
Wayne ][
new specs coming soon!