Thunderbird 850 @ 8.5 x 133 = 1130.5

[Shotgun]

Now that the new 133 bus boards are out... could I just get an 850 Thunderbird (only $4 more than 800, so why not) and without having to connect the L1 bridge (so the multiplier would stay at 8.5) and then just run 133 FSB, I should be able to get roughly 1130.5 MHz out of the thing without really any problems, right? I would think it would be pretty stable, and if I don't have to worry about re-penciling the jumper, all the better 🙂

 

[pillage2001]

You can try though but your chances are pertty slim. 🙂

 

[MCS]

I would say not 🙁

 

[Shotgun]

Ok, since that doesn't sound like such a good idea... let's think about it in the other direction.... what speed Tbird would I need to buy in order to run the bus at 133 to get the magical 1GHz?

So basically looking in the 7.5 multiplier range, that means an unlock would be necessary w/o a doubt... now I just need to know what chip will handle the heat to get to the gig. Hmm, maybe the 850 unlocked to 7.5 and then run at 133? Trying to find the best value now.

On a similar note... in another machine I currently have a stick of 128MB PC100 & a stick of 128MB PC133... the question is, I seriously doubt that PC100 will do PC133, so I'd have to run the bus at 100, and that means with any mobo out today, I would have to run the CPU at 100. With that 100/100 slowdown from a potential 133/133, it would still be faster to run 100/100 with 256MB than 133/133 with 128MB, right? I'm especially thinking about Window's love for ram, and also that 33MHz isn't going to give me that much of a performance boost, certainly not as much as having that additional 128MB would.

 

[Killrose]

The other option is to try and run your PC100 at a higher bus than 100MHz which it should very well do. I'm waiting on some of Compuwiz's ram, so i'm currently running with PC100 ram that does 118MHz cas2 (7.5x118=885MHz / 120MHz cas 3).You might be able to buy a higher speed CPU (with a higher locked multiplier) and run it at a lower buss speed?
Anyhow, PC100 ram will usually do more than it's rated speed allowing you a decent compromise, without the bragging rights🙁

 

[RoninBlackSoul]

Well I got a 850 and I'm pretty sure it can run at 133x8.5 I haven't tried it due to the fact if I go any higher than 1050 my system goes down the drain. Actually anything higher than 900 would make so unstable. Well I narrowed my problem down to my power supply b/c I don't think its providing the juice I need to my system. I must have to much of a load with all the crap I got in it. So in order to run at a high speed, make sure you got a real good PS. I have the Antec pp303 300W but awaiting my Enermax 431W to push this thing to like 1.2G. Cheers!

 

[vexter]

I think most amds have troulble with 133 bus speeds that why they are making a 133 bus speed chip if you can afford it. I think you need too do a little research

 

[vexter]

too clarify. If you look around you wont find anyone with an amd run at 133 bus. The new boards are made for new 133 athlons not the ones in stores now. these amds are nothing like intel chips. Do your homework my freind before you spend youll want the 1.2 athlon any thing else will be wasting you money. If you have too wait until you can afford the 1.2. In 4 mo. 1g wont be worth a dog hair everyone will be at 1.5

 

[DaddyG]

Vexter, your post is simply not true. Lots of 100fsb TBIRDS and Durons are running at 133, some as high as 166 !!. Now, will an 850 hit 1130, maybe. A 33% overclock is not stretching things at all.

 

[Shotgun]

Ok, so now I see a couple of somewhat decent options.... first, assuming processor speed ratings are not a total scam, from what I gather the CPUs are all the same but because of manufacturing yields and stuff the "not so great" CPUs that come out of the process are just labeled with a lower speed (and/or just locked at a lower multiplier).

That being said... what I'm thinking now is since the 100/133 mode is available on the new mobos, I could either get a 850MHz or 1.1Ghz proc and start at 100 and then just bump it up with the nice incremental FSB in the BIOS and see how high I get. I guess the real question is, realistically speaking would the stock 1.1gig really run much faster than the stock 850 if I overclocked both as much as I could respectively?

Because as we all know, the final number is nice and all, but 8.5 x 133 = 1130.5 is way faster than 11.0 x 103 = 1133

I know I saw a post on here that someone succesfully got 10.0 x 133 = 1330 and was running stable, so I'm just wondering (1) if that would be a common result, or if that particluar CPU was just a really heat resistant one, and (2) just how much of a manufacturing difference are we talking about between say a 850 and a 1.2gig CPU? They both have the same core right?