So I thought this is too good to be true and on checking the difference between the -RS version in the bundle deal and the reviewed 8EKRS version I see the latter can do 2000 MT/s as well as 1600 MT/s whereas the former can only do 1600 MT/s.
Now I'm guessing this is some sort of bus speed. For the speed of the chip I'm getting (3000+ athlon) and what I'll be using it for (some games but mainly video editing and music composing with softsynths etc) is there much of a difference between 1600 MT/s and 2000 MT/s capability or will I realistically never go beyond 1600 anyway??
I've searched for info on this on google and here but haven't been able to find anything so any help would be much appreciated!
First, 1600 and 2000 are marketing trick. real speed is 800 MHz and 1000MHz.
The bus is bidirectional, with each direction going at either 800 or 10. Just like when you are on a road, if you go 1 place and come back on a 60 mph, you did not do 120mph.. you were still running 60 on both way. You dont add speed for each way. Same for the bus here.
that being said, the speed of the bus don't really have an impact on performance unless it is st lower than 600MHz.. while greater speed allow more bandwidthm the need right now is not there.
the main difference is that the one with 1000 MHz does use the nforce4 ultra that has SATA2 and the active armour firewall. This is mainly the only difference between the 2 board you're talking about. Since right now SATA2 don't really have an impact on drive performance a that the active armour firewall might cause some problem and some peoples just don't use it, then if you have a good deal on the motherboard, then get it.
THanks so much for the response. I understadn what you're saying. And thanks for the info re: other differences on the boad. I'm not fussed about armoured firewall and from what you're saying i imagine sata2 wont really be taked advantage of until later on anyway...
And I've done a few more hours and I've discovered new stuff. I now understand AMD CPUs have the memory controllers on the chip, and that they have frontside bus values of 1600 or 2000. I'm guessing therefore that when motherboards are stated as supporting 1600 or 2000 what they mean is the type of AMD chip I can put in?
i.e. the 3000+athlon has a FSB of 1600 so am I correct in thinking even if i buy a mobo which can handle 2000 mt/s ill actually see no difference using this chip because the FSB on the chip itself only handles 1600 (or 800) max anyway?
So therefore it only really becomes an issue if i want to put in a dual core amd 4800+ or something later which has a 2000 (or1000) FSB? (and i don't want to anyway - whenever i upgrade iu buy a new mobo too so im not bothered)
So in summary is it true that if i only have a 800/1600 FSB CPU i don't need a mobo which can handle 1000/2000 (unless i wanna upgrade) because it'll make no difference whatsoever?
The fsb is the bus between the memory controller and the CPU. Since the A64 has the memory controller on die, there is no fsb. They have a memory bus, which is the bus between the memory and the controller (cpu). This bus run at the speed the memory run. The 1600 or 1000 bus is the one that is between the chipset and the cpu. And this is not the CPU that make the pace for that bus. it is the chipset that provide the bandwitdh and up to the CPU to use it.
What decide what kind of CPU you can put on the board, it is rather the socket type. You cannot fit a socket 939 CPU in a socket 754 cpu socket. When the board is certified for 939, it is meant to accept the 939 CPU, and sometime, only a BIOS update on the board is required to correctly identify the CPU.
So, in order to later put a X2 cpu that is socket 939, you need a board with a socket 939 (which you'll have and a BIOS revision if the CPU microcode is not detected by the BIOS.
So, you don't want to care about the whole 800/1000 MHz (stop saying 1600 or 2000..it cannot be that way!!!). it is just some of the biggest number that can be found with AMD motherboard and they look nice beside Intel 1066 FSB number.. my motherboard is a 800 MHz one, and I can put all 939 CPU that has been done so far and for the future, I don't care.. As I said, the CPU don't create the BUS, it use what is available from the chipset. You can even set the bus to 600 in BIOS if you want.. or 400, or 200...
The main clock in the a64 is 200 MHz. you double it to get the ddr400 memory bust and you set the multiplier to 4x if you want the 800MHz for the hypertransport bus (the one we are talking about). you can use pc2700 memory too, by using a clock divider to set the frequency to 166 MHz..
well, don't care about all those number.. is is really not useful to know thaem at all, unless you want to overclock. But I won't get into that right now... start simple..
The 1600 or 1000 bus is the one that is between the chipset and the cpu. And this is not the CPU that make the pace for that bus. it is the chipset that provide the bandwitdh and up to the CPU to use it.
So I'm right in thinking if the Athlon 3000+ is quoted at using 800 (as opposed to 1000 the dual cores are quoted as) there's no point in me getting a mobo which offers 1000 - because as you say the mobo offers and it's up to the CPU to use, but a 3000 athlon simply won't use more than 800??
That's mainly what I want to know - will my computer be slower with the Athlon 3000+ and a mobo which only handles 800 as opposed to one which handles 1000, or will it make zero difference?
Sorry but I'm still a little unclear as to this. I know you said something to this effect in your first post but I just want to make sure before I part with my money.
Socket 754 3000+ has the 800 MHz bus, While 939 is set at 1000. But some chipset for 939 a limited at 800. Like mine. And the CPU is a 1000. But I don't care. And you shouldn't.
If you have a car that go 80 mph, and a road that could allow 100mph.. but the traffic is set at 60 mph.. does it mather what kind of car or road you have?
What if the road is limited a 80 mph, and you have a car that goes 100 mph... and the traffic is at 60 mph.. does it matter???
Just get the board, the CPU and what you need and enjoy. STOP worrying about number.. they are just that. MARKETING NUMBER. And don't care about the temps too, because most sensor are unacurate too. There is no reason for your A64 to overheat unless you really screw up the installation, like not removing the clear plastic protecting the thermal pad on the heat sink. AMD has a LARGE sheet, with instruction. Reading it cause no harm... So, if it is stable, let it be. You don't want to care about SATA2 3.0Gb/s[300Mb/s) over SATA1 150 Mb/s too. Those are just number. The drives are no way able to saturate the SATA1 bandwidth, don't expect them to saturate the SATA2.. And yes SATA 1 can use SATA2 drive and vice versa. ATI video card are compatible with nvidia chipset and nvidia video card are compatible with ATI chipset. Do I forget other noob question?? let see...... Oh.. yes. You don't always need SATA (ide is more correct) drivers. A64 chipset support the SATA interface natively. So unless you want to set a RAID array, or use a third party controller, then you don't need to press F6 and install any other drivers. Your BIOS should be set the right way thou.. And reading the mobo's manual don't hurt.. seriously.. It won't bite!! So, take the time to fully read it.. FULLY! That means from the first page to the last. And look at the drawing too. They are usefull...
But seeing as 1000 vs 8000 offers hardly any benefit, I'm beginning to have doubts over the venice 3000+ anyway and am thinking about the sempron 3400 as its the saem price and is comparab;e speewise to the venice 3000 athlon 64. I'd ask you what you think between the two but it's the wrong forum here so I'm going to start a new thread in the approporiate one.
If you're not gaming, then you won't see a huge performance difference between similarly rated Sempron and A64 chips. The A64 has a significant performance increase when gaming. If you go Sempron, then make sure the mobo/CPu are the asme socket. Semprons are available in s939 and s754.