PDA

View Full Version : Processor Speed...


John Baker
April 13th 04, 05:42 AM
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

Van Souza
April 13th 04, 06:19 AM
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
>
>

Wes Newell
April 13th 04, 09:23 AM
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

newsgroups.bellsouth.net
April 13th 04, 05:20 PM
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
>
>

Erez Volach
April 14th 04, 07:42 AM
"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...

Povl H. Pedersen
April 14th 04, 08:43 PM
In article <[email protected]>, 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.

XS11E
April 14th 04, 08:54 PM
"Povl H. Pedersen" > wrote in
:

> In article <[email protected]>, 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.

Wes Newell
April 14th 04, 09:12 PM
On Wed, 14 Apr 2004 19:43:14 +0000, Povl H. Pedersen wrote:

> In article <[email protected]>, 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