Hard Light Productions Forums
Off-Topic Discussion => General Discussion => Topic started by: Petrarch of the VBB on September 12, 2002, 12:58:06 pm
-
I have a new PC, with an athlon XP 1600+, now I know they dont run at 1600Mhz, but what speed do they run at?
Mine is currently running at 1050, which seems a bit low, any suggestions?
BTW, I think that a new section of the Forum, devoted to hardware discussions would be a good idea.
-
I remember reading about a similar problem, I think in a maximum PC
-
You cannot know how useful that was, Thor. Thank you so much.
-
An athlon XP 1600+ should be running at 1,4GHz. It might be BIOS settings or your motherboard's reason that it's not running that fast.
-
right click on my computer and it shows u the RIGHT HZ in right down corner
-
Originally posted by Ashrak
right click on my computer and it shows u the RIGHT HZ in right down corner
Not at my computer. I think that's true on newer motherboards, though. But best way is to check it when the computer starts.
-
Originally posted by Petrarch of th VBB
I have a new PC, with an athlon XP 1600+, now I know they dont run at 1600Mhz, but what speed do they run at?
Mine is currently running at 1050, which seems a bit low, any suggestions?
BTW, I think that a new section of the Forum, devoted to hardware discussions would be a good idea.
Seems low...my XP 1500+ runs at 1.3GHz I believe.
Just as a point of reference, the 'XP' number is a comparison of power to a P4 - i.e. an XP 1600 will at the very least match a 1.6GHz P4.
-
Originally posted by aldo_14
Seems low...my XP 1500+ runs at 1.3GHz I believe.
1.33GHz. :p
*runs*
-
Your welcome. It is probably a inccorectly set bios setting that is slowing you down.
-
actually, it's 1.333ghz. :D
-
Originally posted by CP5670
actually, it's 1.333ghz. :D
Yeah, it can be that.
But not always, your motherboard could have a FSB of 133.1MHz or something like that. :p
*runs far and fast*
-
I saw an Athlon 1800 in the computer magazine as a part of one high end PC. I also got an offer for P4 1,8 GHz. Which one should I take?
-
Originally posted by Razor
I saw an Athlon 1800 in the computer magazine as a part of one high end PC. I also got an offer for P4 1,8 GHz. Which one should I take?
Depends on more than the CPU..... check the price, check the Motherboard performance, check the RAM (and speed), and check the Cache (L1 & L2). also (but less important), if they are nigh identical, check out which has the fastest access hard drive, which may be a help (HD access is the BIG slowdown IMHO).
As a point of reference, the Athlon 1800+ should be the cheaper one.... the F.P benchmarks tend to be a bit weaker than the P4.
-
An athlon XP 1600+ should be running at 1,4GHz.
:nod: that's what i got here
-
My athlon 1500 used to run at 1020mhz, all I did was bump its speed in my bios console. Probably thats where you should start.
-
So how would one go about getting the actual clock speed of an AthlonXP from the name? Do you just subtract 200?
-
as it appears
-
Originally posted by aldo_14
Just as a point of reference, the 'XP' number is a comparison of power to a P4 - i.e. an XP 1600 will at the very least match a 1.6GHz P4.
Actually the performance ratings are referenced to the AMD Thunderbird core not the P4. Therefore, a 1600+ Athlon XP will perform just as well as a 1600Mhz Thunderbird. Of course, having people believe that they're referenced to the P4 doesn't exactly hurt AMD which is why they've never done anything.
Oh and Petrarch, sounds like your FSB speed is set to 100Mhz instead of 133Mhz. It's in your BIOS somewhere, check your motherboard manual.
-
The problem I have with changing the clock speed is this;
surely it must be set that low for a reason. I mean, it might have an overheating or power consumption problem, can anyone help here?
My PSU is 230w, and the CPU fan avgs about 4500rpm.
EDIT, oh and i'm pretty sure my FSB is set to 133, but I'm not 100% certain, I'll have a look later.
-
The reason is that thats the BIOS default. The Athlon XPs all use a FSB speed of 133Mhz, you won't damage it by setting it at that speed.
edit: Lots of people have this problem and the solution is always the same: set the FSB to 133Mhz in the BIOS.
edit2: The Athlon XPs don't throttle their speed down like the Pentium 4s when they overheat. They can be made to but I don't think any boards implement it yet.
-
Originally posted by Razor
I saw an Athlon 1800 in the computer magazine as a part of one high end PC. I also got an offer for P4 1,8 GHz. Which one should I take?
It depends... if it's a regular P4 (Willamette), you should definitely take the Athlon. If it's a P4 with Northwood core, then it's a harder decision...
Originally posted by CP5670
So how would one go about getting the actual clock speed of an AthlonXP from the name? Do you just subtract 200?
Clockspeed*1.5-500. And in processors with speeds of 2400+ and faster, it is Clockspeed*1.5-600. If you have the PR, you can count the megahertz with (PR+500)/1.5, or in speeds of above 2400+, it is (PR+600)/1.5.
Originally posted by Admiral LSD
Actually the performance ratings are referenced to the AMD Thunderbird core not the P4. Therefore, a 1600+ Athlon XP will perform just as well as a 1600Mhz Thunderbird. Of course, having people believe that they're referenced to the P4 doesn't exactly hurt AMD which is why they've never done anything.
They're officially referenced to TB, but in reality it's actually P4. 1500+ isn't as fast as 1.5GHz TB is, except that it might be in some few tests. If even at those.
That's why they changed the PR, it just didn't match P4 speeds anymore. And not all know that it's not just the MHz that matter.
-
Price is the major playing factor between P4 and Athlon XP procs. For example, a top of the line P4 runs at a price above $600 (that was for the 2.8 when it hit the market), while the latest-model AthlonXP (the Thoroughbred, I think) started off at around $300 or less.
Performance wise, just go scrounging around a techie website (like Tom's Hardware or SharkyExtreme) and find benchmark data. It pretty much speaks for itself.
Me, I'm starting to be a bit more partial to AMD because they're far less expensive and provide nearly the same performance as their P4 equivalents. Plus they can be overclocked if need be (due to an unlocked clock multiplier, which Intel doesn't have except on engineering samples that never reach the general public).
Oh, and as for memory, I'd say that 256 mb is the bare minimum, and I highly recommend 512 or more. And of course, get DDR if the board supports it. PC2100 is the slowest I'd get, 2700 is more expensive, but probably worth the extra cost. And to save a few bucks (or pounds, euros, franks, marks, etc., depending on nationality), get a 512mb stick instead of 2 256mb sticks. That's a savings of between $20 and $50, depending on brand. Brands I suggest are Apacer, Crucial, and Micron. Generic brands you've never heard of (and a few name-brands with bad track records *cough*PNY*cough*) probably should be avoided.
And up that power supply to 300 or 350 watts first chance you get. Newer processors and mobos, and all those other cards you'll inevitably get, are very power hungry.
And get some case fans to help keep the internals from overheating. In fact, get a chipset cooler for the mobo, and get a processor fan that is rated higher than the processor speed. This'll help ensure that that shiny new piece of plastic won't melt itself after a year of hard use.
Er....sheesh, where'd all that come from? ;)
-
Originally posted by JC Denton
Price is the major playing factor ........ a year of hard use.
Er....sheesh, where'd all that come from? ;)
Dude I just saved all that for when I do my upgrade at xmas...;)
-
Anyway, I've set it to the right speed in the BIOS, and aside from about an extra 5degrees C in heat, it's fine. However, sandra 2002 says that now the FSB is set to 133, the chipset (sis730) is not happy.
-
It says that same thing about an i850E driving a 533FSB Northwood Pentium 4. It should be OK.
-
Goooooood.
Why do they make programs whose sole purpose is to complain about your machine?
-
Originally posted by JC Denton
Me, I'm starting to be a bit more partial to AMD because they're far less expensive and provide nearly the same performance as their P4 equivalents. Plus they can be overclocked if need be (due to an unlocked clock multiplier, which Intel doesn't have except on engineering samples that never reach the general public).
The new Northwood P4's are much better for OC'ing. You can increase FSB easily, and having 2000MHz with 200FSB is a lot faster than having 2000MHz with 100FSB. Northwoods run cool, Athlons usually pretty hot. You can overclock the new Thoroughbreds pretty good, but Thunderbirds and the XP's with Palomino core weren't that good. And they have locked clock multiplier, which is however possible to unlock, unlike P4.