My processor is supposed to be 800 fsb but its not...

[BillyBobJoel71]

[deleted]

 

[BitByBit]

P4s use a 'quad-pumped' FSB, that is, data gets transmitted 4 times every clock cycle, resulting in an effective speed of 800MHz for a native speed of 200MHz.

 

[bball1523]

Originally posted by: BitByBit
P4s use a 'quad-pumped' FSB, that is, data gets transmitted 4 times every clock cycle, resulting in an effective speed of 800MHz for a native speed of 200MHz.

just wondering, is there an AMD equivalent to Intel's 4x pumped fsb?

 

[Bona Fide]

AMD's "fsb" is known as HTT. It runs at 1000mhz, which makes it better than Intel's 800FSB.

 

[Lorn]

Originally posted by: Bona Fide
AMD's "fsb" is known as HTT. It runs at 1000mhz, which makes it better than Intel's 800FSB.

Haha, had to slip that in there didn't ya.

 

[BitByBit]

Originally posted by: Bona Fide
AMD's "fsb" is known as HTT. It runs at 1000mhz, which makes it better than Intel's 800FSB.

Nooooooooooooooooo, not another one!
The Athlon 64, like the Athlon XP, utilises the 'double data-rate' EV6 memory bus, that essentially doubles the bandwidth available to the CPU by reading/transmitting data on both the rising and falling edges of the clock cycle.
This results in an effective memory bus of 400MHz for Athlon 64s at stock speed, and also for the Athlon XP 3200+.
Where the Athlon 64 differs is that its memory controller is now integrated onto the CPU die, rather than on the chipset, which means now there is no 'FSB' as such.
The reason socket 939 Athlon 64s can utilise twice the bandwidth of socket 754 A64s is due to the bus width, which is 128-bits on the 939 platform - double that of 754, socket A platforms.
On the P4, the FSB carries data between the CPU and memory, and also to the devices (GPU, HDD etc.).
The K8 has replaced this approach with a dedicated memory bus (as stated above), but also Hypertransport, which connects the processor to the devices, and also to other processors in multi-processor systems via 'links'.

 

[BillyBobJoel71]

[deleted]

 

[Vegitto]

Well, Super Typhoon, you probably have a Prescott. And Prescotts are very useful for oh, say, frying an egg? Or, warming your floor. Prescotts get very, very hot. You might want to pop an after-market heatsink on that, baby.

 

[imported_Kensai]

Good job, BitByBit. You beat me to it.

 

[douglasb]

Originally posted by: BitByBit

Originally posted by: Bona Fide
AMD's "fsb" is known as HTT. It runs at 1000mhz, which makes it better than Intel's 800FSB.

Nooooooooooooooooo, not another one!
The Athlon 64, like the Athlon XP, utilises the 'double data-rate' EV6 memory bus, that essentially doubles the bandwidth available to the CPU by reading/transmitting data on both the rising and falling edges of the clock cycle.
This results in an effective memory bus of 400MHz for Athlon 64s at stock speed, and also for the Athlon XP 3200+.
Where the Athlon 64 differs is that its memory controller is now integrated onto the CPU die, rather than on the chipset, which means now there is no 'FSB' as such.
The reason socket 939 Athlon 64s can utilise twice the bandwidth of socket 754 A64s is due to the bus width, which is 128-bits on the 939 platform - double that of 754, socket A platforms.
On the P4, the FSB carries data between the CPU and memory, and also to the devices (GPU, HDD etc.).
The K8 has replaced this approach with a dedicated memory bus (as stated above), but also Hypertransport, which connects the processor to the devices, and also to other processors in multi-processor systems via 'links'.

There are 800 MHz and 1000MHz HT A64 boards on the market, depending on chipset. Also, Socket A is capable of 128-bit in dual channel, while Socket 754 is not. Dual channel actually makes very little difference in real-world performance. The biggest advantage the A64 platform has over other platforms is the on-die memory controller (HyperTransport) which eliminates the FSB bottleneck. On Athlon XP and Penitum systems, the CPU has to interact with RAM through the northbridge, which is what slows it down.

 

[linkgoron]

Originally posted by: Vegitto
Well, Super Typhoon, you probably have a Prescott. And Prescotts are very useful for oh, say, frying an egg? Or, warming your floor. Prescotts get very, very hot. You might want to pop an after-market heatsink on that, baby.

People call Porkster a fanboy, but that is fanboy talk too. P4s aren't good as A64s in most cases, but they are good CPUs. BTW, heating problems (shutdown and all that) are only from 3.4Ghz I think.

 

[douglasb]

All of the Prescott cores run VERY hot. If it's running so hot that it shuts down, then that is a very serious heat problem. At the very least, all of them have heat issues, some worse than others. The 3.4 GHz and above are unacceptable in my opinion. I have a 3 GHz Prescott and it's a decent performer, but if I had to do it all over again, I would have gotten an A64 or a Northwood core. There's a reason people call it the "Press-hot."

 

[stratman]

Originally posted by: linkgoron

Originally posted by: Vegitto
Well, Super Typhoon, you probably have a Prescott. And Prescotts are very useful for oh, say, frying an egg? Or, warming your floor. Prescotts get very, very hot. You might want to pop an after-market heatsink on that, baby.

People call Porkster a fanboy, but that is fanboy talk too. P4s aren't good as A64s in most cases, but they are good CPUs. BTW, heating problems (shutdown and all that) are only from 3.4Ghz I think.

Yeah, I think you went a little overboard with that comment, Vegitto

 

[RichUK]

i think BitByBit, has explained it quite well although someone mentioned that AMD K8's do not have an FSB, well that is just false if AMD did not have an FSB then what is the chipset for .. well the chipset is there to offer a BUS in which all other devices can communincate with the processor this would include the PCI bus AGP bus .. PCI-e lanes, IDE, SATA .. this is the FSB but just minus the memory communication catch my drift..

the problem with the P4's architecture is that it only has an FSB, which all devices communication through, and as you know with a BUS topology only one device can communicate at one time, this therefore means that the RAM (system memory), has to constantly fight with the other devices for bandwidth so this a bottle neck with regards to the P4's.

This is where AMD's clever engineers decided to put the mem controllers on the CPU die itself to reduce latency and bandwidth issues, this is refered to as a Hypertransport Link, and you will also see these on the Opterons that support communication through 2,4 and 8 processor's, but with the Athlon it is only one for the memory..

RichUK

 

[rise]

Originally posted by: linkgoron

Originally posted by: Vegitto
Well, Super Typhoon, you probably have a Prescott. And Prescotts are very useful for oh, say, frying an egg? Or, warming your floor. Prescotts get very, very hot. You might want to pop an after-market heatsink on that, baby.

People call Porkster a fanboy, but that is fanboy talk too. P4s aren't good as A64s in most cases, but they are good CPUs. BTW, heating problems (shutdown and all that) are only from 3.4Ghz I think.

yeah, for a guy who starts a thread in FI about trolls, that statement is mighty trollish.

 

[JohnAn2112]

Originally posted by: douglasb
All of the Prescott cores run VERY hot. If it's running so hot that it shuts down, then that is a very serious heat problem. At the very least, all of them have heat issues, some worse than others. The 3.4 GHz and above are unacceptable in my opinion. I have a 3 GHz Prescott and it's a decent performer, but if I had to do it all over again, I would have gotten an A64 or a Northwood core. There's a reason people call it the "Press-hot."

I wouldn't go as far as saying that the Prescotts run "VERY hot".

My old 2.8 Prescott that was overclocked ran at under 55C load. Sure, they run hotter than Northwoods, but I think people just tend to exaggerate when it comes to Prescott temps.

 

[RichUK]

Originally posted by: OCZ John

Originally posted by: douglasb
All of the Prescott cores run VERY hot. If it's running so hot that it shuts down, then that is a very serious heat problem. At the very least, all of them have heat issues, some worse than others. The 3.4 GHz and above are unacceptable in my opinion. I have a 3 GHz Prescott and it's a decent performer, but if I had to do it all over again, I would have gotten an A64 or a Northwood core. There's a reason people call it the "Press-hot."

I wouldn't go as far as saying that the Prescotts run "VERY hot".

My old 2.8 Prescott that was overclocked ran at under 55C load. Sure, they run hotter than Northwoods, but I think people just tend to exaggerate when it comes to Prescott temps.

enit who cares about temps just get a good cooler i say.. but at the end of the day AMD just pulls the IPC count over Intel .. so thats why intel loses .. and not to mention the wattage hmm the intels lose on that aswell .. but who cares anyways thats all old hat now

 

[Continuity27]

Temperatures do matter to an extent though. Just because Intel's chips may be able to handle the heat better than most chips doesn't mean the thousands of components on the motherboard, and the memory, chipset, video cards, etc will handle the extra heat load. Several C actually has a lot of impact from a component like the processor - which is centered in air flow directions. When something is hot, and heats up the surrounding area, another component - maybe on the motherboard could suffer horribly.

It's always better to be cooler, the system is much more than just the processor - which may in and of itself handle the heat.

 

[RichUK]

Originally posted by: Continuity27
Temperatures do matter to an extent though. Just because Intel's chips may be able to handle the heat better than most chips doesn't mean the thousands of components on the motherboard, and the memory, chipset, video cards, etc will handle the extra heat load. Several C actually has a lot of impact from a component like the processor - which is centered in air flow directions. When something is hot, and heats up the surrounding area, another component - maybe on the motherboard could suffer horribly.

It's always better to be cooler, the system is much more than just the processor - which may in and of itself handle the heat.

a can tell you now that a couple of degrees will have very little affect on the system performance the only thing that might suffer is the Chipset and graphics, most cases are designed with sufficient convection within the case to draw away hot air from hotspots produced by the processor, what you have to remember is that on all motherboards the Proc is at the top and heat rises so this will miss most components, and then it will get exhausted out of the case ..

EDIT: damn typos

 

[BitByBit]

Originally posted by: SuperTyphoon
thanks for the information. i was getting a little worried about my "rip off P4." bitmybit, you have the same processor i have. does yours get really really hot?

Yes, it does.
It's currently idling at 55C, but it gets up to 67C under load.
Noisy fan too.

 

[BitByBit]

Originally posted by: douglasb

There are 800 MHz and 1000MHz HT A64 boards on the market, depending on chipset. Also, Socket A is capable of 128-bit in dual channel, while Socket 754 is not. Dual channel actually makes very little difference in real-world performance. The biggest advantage the A64 platform has over other platforms is the on-die memory controller (HyperTransport) which eliminates the FSB bottleneck. On Athlon XP and Penitum systems, the CPU has to interact with RAM through the northbridge, which is what slows it down.

Socket A only ever used a 64-bit memory bus.
It did however, use two 64-bit memory modules in dual-channel mode, but obviously couldn't utilise the bandwidth they put out.
There was, I believe, a slight benefit in running them in DC mode however, but don't quote me on that.

The memory controller does not have anything to do with Hypertransport.
The K8 uses a crossbar to switch between Hypertransport and the memory bus.

 

[BillyBobJoel71]

[deleted]