Processor Speed...

I bought an AMD 64 3000+ processor, running on a Shuttle AN50R MB. My OS,
XP Pro, shows that it's 1.99 Ghz. From what I remember...and i know that
this is a different chip than the regular chips, it would be about 200 Mhz
less than the number, like my old 1600 AMD was actually 1.4Ghz. Is the
1.99Ghz correct? Or am i missing something I need to change in the BIOS?

Thanks,

John

AMD runs like a 3000 but is really 1900... so it runs like an intel 3000
but does it at 1900...

John Baker wrote:
I bought an AMD 64 3000+ processor, running on a Shuttle AN50R MB. My OS,
XP Pro, shows that it's 1.99 Ghz. From what I remember...and i know that
this is a different chip than the regular chips, it would be about 200 Mhz
less than the number, like my old 1600 AMD was actually 1.4Ghz. Is the
1.99Ghz correct? Or am i missing something I need to change in the BIOS?

Thanks,

John

On Tue, 13 Apr 2004 04:42:35 +0000, John Baker wrote:

I bought an AMD 64 3000+ processor, running on a Shuttle AN50R MB. My OS,
XP Pro, shows that it's 1.99 Ghz. From what I remember...and i know that
this is a different chip than the regular chips, it would be about 200 Mhz
less than the number, like my old 1600 AMD was actually 1.4Ghz. Is the
1.99Ghz correct? Or am i missing something I need to change in the BIOS?

Default speed for the 3000+ is 2000MHz (10x200). If it carried it out
you'd see it running at 1999.xx MHz. Bugged me too, so I just set the FSB
to 201 and it ran at 2009.96MHz. IOW's don't worry about it or raise FSB.

--
Abit KT7-Raid (KT133) Tbred B core CPU @2400MHz (24x100FSB)
http://mysite.verizon.net/res0exft/cpu.htm

Some of the reviews of AMD64 mobos that I have read say the the bus speed
( although it is supposed to be 200mhz ) ranges between 199mhz and 201mhz
normally... Weird huh? It really depends on the mobo design and clock
gen...( of course, a 1mhz dif isn't much but it can give a mild performance
increase in benchmarks... )

"John Baker" wrote in message
...
I bought an AMD 64 3000+ processor, running on a Shuttle AN50R MB. My OS,
XP Pro, shows that it's 1.99 Ghz. From what I remember...and i know that
this is a different chip than the regular chips, it would be about 200 Mhz
less than the number, like my old 1600 AMD was actually 1.4Ghz. Is the
1.99Ghz correct? Or am i missing something I need to change in the BIOS?

Thanks,

John

"newsgroups.bellsouth.net" wrote in message
. ..
Some of the reviews of AMD64 mobos that I have read say the the bus speed
( although it is supposed to be 200mhz ) ranges between 199mhz and 201mhz
normally... Weird huh? It really depends on the mobo design and clock
gen...( of course, a 1mhz dif isn't much but it can give a mild
performance
increase in benchmarks... )

"John Baker" wrote in message
...
I bought an AMD 64 3000+ processor, running on a Shuttle AN50R MB. My
OS,
XP Pro, shows that it's 1.99 Ghz. From what I remember...and i know
that
this is a different chip than the regular chips, it would be about 200
Mhz
less than the number, like my old 1600 AMD was actually 1.4Ghz. Is the
1.99Ghz correct? Or am i missing something I need to change in the
BIOS?

Thanks,

John




That's 0.5%. It would be like complaining your Pentium 133 rated CPU (133.33
MHz) was running at 132.66 - 134 MHz. Some clock generators are more
accurate than others...

In article DLKec.663$432.195@fed1read01, Van Souza wrote:
AMD runs like a 3000 but is really 1900... so it runs like an intel 3000
but does it at 1900...

Wrong. The comparison is NOT Intel, but a 1GHz Thunderbird.

"Povl H. Pedersen" wrote in
:

In article DLKec.663$432.195@fed1read01, Van Souza wrote:
AMD runs like a 3000 but is really 1900... so it runs like an
intel 3000 but does it at 1900...

Wrong. The comparison is NOT Intel, but a 1GHz Thunderbird.

I believe he's correct. The "+" sign after an AMD speed means it will
benchmark as fast or faster than the Intel chip of the same speed, even
though it's actual clock speed is lower.

On Wed, 14 Apr 2004 19:43:14 +0000, Povl H. Pedersen wrote:

In article DLKec.663$432.195@fed1read01, Van Souza wrote:
AMD runs like a 3000 but is really 1900... so it runs like an intel 3000
but does it at 1900...

Wrong. The comparison is NOT Intel, but a 1GHz Thunderbird.

You are very mistaken. It's for direct comparison to the competition,
which is Intel, This is spelled out in this doc.

Benchmarking_Methodology2_v2.5.pdf

--
Abit KT7-Raid (KT133) Tbred B core CPU @2400MHz (24x100FSB)
http://mysite.verizon.net/res0exft/cpu.htm