Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

FSB: increase of 267 MHz worth the 2 mo. wait?

Last response: in CPUs
Share
February 13, 2003 12:20:41 AM

Disregarding price concerns, does anyone think the wait for the P4 Canterwood chipset (i875P) with 800MHz FSB is worth it? I can either put together a P4 3.06GHz right now or wait for the 3.2GHz 800MHz FSB to arrive in mid to late April. What's your opinion regarding the performance increase between the two? Enough of a jump to warrant the extra wait? I understand there's little to no hard data on the performance of the new chipset. I just want to kinda get an idea of everyone's thinking on this one. Thanks in advance.


-Jarim23
February 13, 2003 8:15:18 PM

800MT FSB should be a very powerful boost, it's a 50% higher clock than 533MT, which was in itself a 33% boost over the 400MT FSB. With DDR400 Dual Channel, it promises a serious deathblow for performance, and then add in Canterwood's "enhanced performance" over the standard Springdale (probably will be more optimized to squeeze more efficient bandwidth usage), and you got the answer = I believe you should wait.

--
This post is brought to you by Eden, on a Via Eden, in the garden of Eden. :smile:
February 14, 2003 3:56:21 AM

Sounds like a logical conclusion to me. Can't say logic helps very much with impatience, but I think I can make it. Thanks for the reply, Eden. Anyone else want to chime in?


-Jarim23
Related resources
a b à CPUs
February 14, 2003 4:35:52 AM

If you can wait, wait. I've been waiting 9 months for my upgrade, and I haven't seen anything that required urgency.

I don't think the 800 bus will really mean too much for performance, but it will mean a lot for future upgradability.

<font color=blue>There are no stupid questions, only stupid people doling out faulty information based upon rumors, myths, and poor logic!</font color=blue>
February 14, 2003 9:49:06 AM

Agree with Crashman. Also, from the application point of view some can benefit more than others, so it will be interesting to know which one are you using.

Here you have and <A HREF="http://www.anandtech.com/showdoc.html?i=1615&p=6" target="_new"> Anadtech review </A> where both 2.4Ghz at 400 and 533 are together, but running on RDRAM. I think it can be an indication of what programs can benefit more for a higher FSB.

Anyway, upgradability will be the strongest point and just for it I will wait.


Still looking for a <b>good online retailer</b> in Spain :frown: <P ID="edit"><FONT SIZE=-1><EM>Edited by baldurga on 02/14/03 02:24 PM.</EM></FONT></P>
February 14, 2003 9:48:51 PM

Thanks for the input. Any mention of the P4 3.2GHz 800MHz FSB being coupled with RDRAM around the same time as the Dual DDR 400 setups? Would you recommend this route if available?

-Jarim23
February 14, 2003 10:01:28 PM

havnt heard anything no...
Intel wants to get rid of rdram...
the Dual channel PC3200 route is much better methinks.


<b>Anyone claiming they can see the difference
between 450 and 500 FPS in Quake3 deserves to
be severely beaten with a rock. :smile: </b>
February 15, 2003 12:04:33 AM

Also, I know that Gigabyte has a motherboard ready for the Canterwood chipset...how about any other high-end motherboard makers? Asus, Abit, etc.

-Jarim23
Anonymous
a b à CPUs
February 15, 2003 12:28:19 AM

That's too bad because I'd really like to see some Intel PC1200 support, and have the opportunity to formulate my own opinions. If what ole Raystonn used to say has any correctness RD is right on this performance knee speedwise, and was about to start kicking some serious arse once we hit the PC1200 range, only to broaden the gap with incremental increases from there.
February 15, 2003 1:41:04 AM

I guess... PC4200 is around... and DC PC4200 would be awesome, but i just cant see it happening.

<b>Anyone claiming they can see the difference
between 450 and 500 FPS in Quake3 deserves to
be severely beaten with a rock. :smile: </b>
a b à CPUs
February 15, 2003 3:03:55 AM

RDRAM for the "800" bus is a pipe dream right now. The next speed of RDRAM would be PC1200, which has a 600MHz bus. As you can see, the 533MHz PC1066 is a good match for the "533" bus, while 600MHz PC1200 doesn't match the "800" bus.

<font color=blue>There are no stupid questions, only stupid people doling out faulty information based upon rumors, myths, and poor logic!</font color=blue>
a b à CPUs
February 15, 2003 3:05:31 AM

You would need PC1600 for the "800" bus to perform at it's peak! Or RIMM6400 would be the 32-bit flavor. It's highly unlikely at this point that RDRAM of that speed will ever be released for the PC.

<font color=blue>There are no stupid questions, only stupid people doling out faulty information based upon rumors, myths, and poor logic!</font color=blue>
Anonymous
a b à CPUs
February 15, 2003 2:01:17 PM

OK, yeah, PC1600, thanks. After all the hype and waiting now we never get to see the stuff in action? that blows....
February 15, 2003 4:15:47 PM

You should wait surely i was thinking of it and have been waiting from january so you better hang in there and in the meanwhile save enough for the exxxagerated price it will be offered and if you wait you will get benefit of getting serial ata HDD's on the market shelves
so double benefit!!!
need i say more

:cool: & :eek:  is <font color=red> my frame of mind </font color=red>
so enjoy life but!!!!!!
a b à CPUs
February 15, 2003 5:01:24 PM

Hehe, here's where it would get tricky with the names. You see, 800MHz RDRAM COULD be called PC1600 RDRAM, but it would get confused with PC1600 DDR SDRAM which runs at 100MHz (DDR200). So if they released it, they might change the name, or simply release only a 32-bit version called RIMM6400. But I seriously doubt any PC memory will be released at this speed.

<font color=blue>There are no stupid questions, only stupid people doling out faulty information based upon rumors, myths, and poor logic!</font color=blue>
!