I have been wondering what I am about to ask for awhile and am looking for some opinions based on true usage and not brand/CPU loyalty. I also am asking for the responses to be based on stock settings, not overclocking.
I have spent like most of us, way to many dollars just to try the latest and greatest. However, I just don't have enough of the green to keep learning on my own and figured it's time to gain some info from others.
1st, on any given Intel motherboard that supports both 100 and 133 bus speeds, how much real advantage, if any, does the bus speed provide with an equal CPU. (IE: 800x133 vs. 800x100)
2nd, I went from a BX based board to a VIA Apollo Pro 133a chipset a while back assuming the newer features would enhance performance. (ATA66 and 133 native bus for instance.) I found the performance of the VIA chipset/drivers made this change mute. My benchmarks all tested about the same with the same CPU/memory. (Overclocked to 133 on the BX, native on the VIA)
3rd, I then just had to try one of the original Athlons. An 800. Again, I used VIA, but the KX133 chipset. I found the overall performance was less and gaming slower, 800 Athlon to 800 P3. Is this to be expected?
And this leads me to my final question. The curious side of me has me tempted yet again.
My current setup is a 866 P3 on a P3C-E i820 board with 128 MB of 800 MHz RDRAM. I am using the Voodoo 5 AGP for a graphics board. The sytem runs great, but like a junkie am always looking at more. With AMD's planned October price slash and the pending appearence of DDR SDRAM, do you guys think a Thunderbird 1.1 with DDR ram would substantially outperform my current setup? Or would this just be another change without any fizz.
I realize that DDR and the next motherboards are not here yet, but am just looking for opinions to determine if I am wasting my time even thinking about this.
Thanks in advance...I should have done more of this before some of my own experiments, but the curious and addictive side of me always wants to take over. LOL
jwb
I have spent like most of us, way to many dollars just to try the latest and greatest. However, I just don't have enough of the green to keep learning on my own and figured it's time to gain some info from others.
1st, on any given Intel motherboard that supports both 100 and 133 bus speeds, how much real advantage, if any, does the bus speed provide with an equal CPU. (IE: 800x133 vs. 800x100)
2nd, I went from a BX based board to a VIA Apollo Pro 133a chipset a while back assuming the newer features would enhance performance. (ATA66 and 133 native bus for instance.) I found the performance of the VIA chipset/drivers made this change mute. My benchmarks all tested about the same with the same CPU/memory. (Overclocked to 133 on the BX, native on the VIA)
3rd, I then just had to try one of the original Athlons. An 800. Again, I used VIA, but the KX133 chipset. I found the overall performance was less and gaming slower, 800 Athlon to 800 P3. Is this to be expected?
And this leads me to my final question. The curious side of me has me tempted yet again.
My current setup is a 866 P3 on a P3C-E i820 board with 128 MB of 800 MHz RDRAM. I am using the Voodoo 5 AGP for a graphics board. The sytem runs great, but like a junkie am always looking at more. With AMD's planned October price slash and the pending appearence of DDR SDRAM, do you guys think a Thunderbird 1.1 with DDR ram would substantially outperform my current setup? Or would this just be another change without any fizz.
I realize that DDR and the next motherboards are not here yet, but am just looking for opinions to determine if I am wasting my time even thinking about this.
Thanks in advance...I should have done more of this before some of my own experiments, but the curious and addictive side of me always wants to take over. LOL
jwb
Facebook
Twitter