What do you think is faster a......

Travis

Junior Member
Dec 16, 1999
24
0
0
What do you think is faster a 733 o.c. to 1G with a FSB speed of 140 or a o.c. to 880 with a FSB of 160? I realize with games such as QuakeIII that the higher processor speed will show better frame rates, but what do you think will be best for overall performance?

Trav
 

Travis

Junior Member
Dec 16, 1999
24
0
0
Sure it is I have a Asus CUSL2 which allows me to run my processor at 1G while keeping my FSB at 140, the motherboard gives you several ratios to choose from.

Trav
 

spamboy

Banned
Aug 28, 2000
1,033
1
0
Dude, there is a differnce between the memory speed and the FSB. Tonec is right, 1000 is IMPOSSIBLE. Your memory might only be at 140 because of some crazy mulitplier you seem to think you have, but the chipset will be at 181, which is like 30 MHz higher than you can go. Give it up and get a 700, which goes to 933 and maybe even 1000 at reasonable FSB settings.
 

zision

Member
Jan 20, 2000
118
0
0
I had been wondering the same thing in a way, as I have a motherboard with the VIA Apollo Pro chipset which allows you to clock your RAM 33MHz higher or lower than your FSB.
 

Travis

Junior Member
Dec 16, 1999
24
0
0
Spamboy, thank you for your well intended but misinformed response. However, if your read my post it is obvious I know what FSB is and my question is valid. If you do not understand the ratio/multiplier as implemented on the ASUS CULS2 I suggest you go to their website. YES my processor does run at 1G and that is a fact not a misinterpretation. It is POSSIBLE! Subsequently, that brings me to my original post if I run my processor @ 1G with my ram at 140 is the computer faster than my processor @ 880 with my ram at 160. Spamboy I realize this idea may be hard for you to conceptualize but before critizing someone make sure you understand the question.

Trav
 

Moving Target

Senior member
Dec 6, 1999
614
0
0
At either point I don't think a diff in speed would be noticable, so I would run it where it is most stable.
 

divinemartyr

Platinum Member
Oct 18, 2000
2,439
1
71
Travis,

You really shouldn't snap at people who are trying to help you, criticizing others for their 'input' won't get you too many responses around the forum.

Rather than asking people what's faster, I think the best way to find out what you're looking for is to simply benchmark your system. Anyone can try to give you an educated guess, but many things can factor into the speed of your system, including unique components like your video card and specific brand of ram you're using. Try doing several benchmarks, running a quake3 timedemo, winmark, etc, with both setups, and whatever runs faster is your answer! =)

divinemartyr
 

Supradude

Golden Member
Nov 3, 2000
1,727
0
0
In my experience, the overall performance is better with the setting where your ram is clocked the highest as long as its stable... my 550e runs better @ 860 cas 2 than @ 900~ish cas 3
 

Travis

Junior Member
Dec 16, 1999
24
0
0
Hey divinemartyr if you noticed I did not snap at people such as yourself who offered constructive commits. However, spamboy was purposely being a jerk. And yea I know how to benchmark and I really don't need anyone help I just thought it was an interesting question with all of the emphasis on processor speed; it seems the influence of the memory speed is overlooked especially when you are above 133 :) .


Travis
 

Sunny129

Diamond Member
Nov 14, 2000
4,823
6
81
I don't think travis has snapped at anyone here. it seems to me that nobody is giving any constructive criticism, rather they are just giving criticism. take note that the proposed system setup is very possible. in order for a 5.5 clock multiplier to reach 1 GHz, an fsb of 182 is needed. with a 7/9 memory ratio, this places the RAM clock approximately @ 140 mHz. with a 1/5 PCI ratio, the PCI bus clock is set to approximately 33 mHz, all of which are in spec with his specifications.
 

spamboy

Banned
Aug 28, 2000
1,033
1
0
OK, obviously you know something I don't, so until I understand, I won't pass anymore judgment. Now then, help me understand. First off. When you are overclocked to 1Gig, is the FSB really at 182? If not, how could you have changed the mulitplier, because they're all locked. I didn't see anything on the website, maybe I just didn't look hard eouugh. I don't think you're lying, I just want to know what's up. So the board has like some kind of external mulitpier thing seperate from the CPU, or what? How does that work? Sorry, I didn't mean to sound so bitchy before, but it sounded so off the wall I was sure you had to be an idiot. Obviously not.
 

spamboy

Banned
Aug 28, 2000
1,033
1
0
Sure enough, there is some kind of crazy jumper setting that puts the CPU multiplier higher than the FSB. I never heard of anything like that. How the hell does that work? In any event, I agree with whoever it was who said put the memory as high as possible. Either way thats a smoking rig though.
 

Sunny129

Diamond Member
Nov 14, 2000
4,823
6
81
yes, it appears that i'm a bit confused now. as i look back to the top of this thread and read your original post Travis, i notice d that you said you can run a 733 @ 1GHz with an fsb of 140 mHz, or at least you are assuming its possible. now it is by now common knowledge that all intel CPUs are multiplier locked, and there is no hardware or software that can override that and manipulate the clock multipliers on any intel CPU. if you look at your 2nd to last post here, after you attempt to correct spamboy, you make reference to your original question in your very first post, only this time you ask the question with the word "ram" replacing the word "FSB" in the original question. this is why we are all assuming that you made a simple goof and accidentally called the RAM speed the FSB speed. like i said in my first post, with an fsb of 182, the 7/9 memory ratio would produce a memory clock of approximately 140 mHz. where are we deriving the 182 mHz fsb? well in order to run a 733 @ 1 GHz we must multiply the already locked multiplier (which is set by intel to 5.5 default) by a 182 mHz fsb to get approximately 1000 mHz, or 1 GHz. now running a P3 733 @ 1 GHz while keeping the FSB @ 140 is indeed impossible to the knowledge of the rest of us. since we know that the multiplier of the 733 is locked at 5.5, we know that an FSB of 182 mHz is needed to reach 1 GHz. if your fsb were only 140, you would only be reaching a CPU speed of 770 mHz, not 1 GHz. this is b/c you are only increasing the fsb 7 mHz above is default 133 mHz. so it is perfectly clear that the fsb must be set to 182 mHz in order to run a P3 733 @ 1 GHz. and like i said b4, that specific fsb speed with the 7/9 memory ratio will give a memory speed of approx. 140 mHz. i'm sure you just mixed up some words or something during your original post...its no biggie
 

Cosmic_Horror

Golden Member
Oct 10, 1999
1,500
0
0
umm ok...

so to get the cpu running at 1ghz then you need a fsb at 182Mhz (which has some wierd dividers for pci and memory to keep them in spec.

does this board have a wierd divider for agp also?



to answer the question, run some benchmark and see what setup run faster, then you will know. :)

 

spamboy

Banned
Aug 28, 2000
1,033
1
0
No, no guys, I checked Asus's website, Travis was right, we were all wrong. On THIS PARTICULAR BOARD there is some weird thing it does that multiplies the FSB before it gets to the CPU, sort of multipling the mulitplier, if you will. The FSB remains at 140, but the frequecy the CPU multiplies with it's multiplier is 182, I'm pretty sure. It's really wierd, but if you look at Asus's jumper setting and charts they have a SEPERATE column for the resulting "CPU frequecy" than for the FSB. For most of the settings, it equals the FSB, but there are some where it is higher. Is this widely known? Does Anand know about it? It brings new overclocking possiblites to 133 FSB chips...
 

Sunny129

Diamond Member
Nov 14, 2000
4,823
6
81
i know that with a 182 fsb, the memory divider must be 7/9 to get 140 mHz, and the PCI divider must be 1/5 to get 33 mHz. what i dont know is whether these dividers are wierd or not. i'm not up to date on what the standard dividers are...

by the way, i believe the AGP bus defaults at around 66 mHz, which would be a 1/3 divider on the 182 fsb, and i'm pretty sure some of the standard AGP dividers are 1/2, 1/3, and 2/3
 

Sunny129

Diamond Member
Nov 14, 2000
4,823
6
81
well it looks like i'll have to take a look at the info at ASUS.com. after all, i do have a CUSL2, but i havent gotten a chance to use it yet. but it sounds like this is a feature that would be most useful once i start using my CUSL2...
 

Linh

Platinum Member
Oct 10, 1999
2,409
0
0
dang where have you guys been? this has been old news since the release of the VIA Apollo Pro 133A chipset

quote from anand's review of the px4vx



<< The memory bus itself can run at either the FSB frequency, which by default is 100MHz, or at FSB +/- 33MHz which would put the memory bus at 133MHz while the FSB runs at 100MHz. The ability to set the memory bus frequency allows PC100 memory owners to use their memory without having to upgrade to PC133 while at the same time not sacrificing performance for those that do have PC133 memory >>

 

Linh

Platinum Member
Oct 10, 1999
2,409
0
0
as for which is faster, i'd say the higher FSB would be faster. i believe at the higher resolutions, anything above 1024x768, the vid card is the limiting factor in framerates and so there wouldn't really be a difference between a p880 or p1000
 

Travis

Junior Member
Dec 16, 1999
24
0
0
Thats ok spamboy I was a little snappy also. However, I must admit I'm suprised so many of you guys have not heard of this board or the concept before. VIA has been using this concept for a couple of generations of motherboards. For those of you who are not familiar with the ASUS CULS2 and enjoy overclocking Intel processors it is probably the best board out there. Check out Anand's review. This board gives you a plethera of obtions.

Travis