Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

Pentium 4 2.0 ghz 100FSb too low?

Last response: in CPUs
January 10, 2004 8:48:32 PM

here are my specs

ASUS P4P800 Deluxe
Thermal Take 420Watt powersupply
1GB of OCZ pc3200 CAS2 512 DDR400
ATI RADEON 9800 pro

Everything else looks great but my CPU, im thinking of what to do?

Saw a good price as well
in CDN funds

I need opinions and if I do need a new CPU plz write a description why I need it becuase I need to convince my Dad to purchase it online as im 18 and dont have a credit card and im gonna pay back cash


More about : pentium ghz 100fsb low

January 11, 2004 3:26:50 AM

Are you saying ur current CPU is a Pentium4 2Ghz 100FSB?
I would try to overclock that to 133FSB if possible, which makes 533FSB
if u really want a cpu, just tell ur dad that a Pentium 4 based on <b>800FSB</b> is <b>a lot</b> faster than the <b>old</b> 400FSB, and it comes with the <b>HT (Hyper Treading Technology)</b>, which makes the new P4 becomes even <b>faster</b> in <b>multitasking environment</b>
January 11, 2004 3:52:37 AM

Could OC that chip but those 400fsb chips but wouldnt be worth it. Get a P4 3ghz 800fsb chip for a descent price now. That will give you a rig to last a few years.

Barton 2500+ @ 2200mhz (10x220 vcore @ 1.8)
Asus A7N8X Dlx 440 FSB
1gb Geil GD pc3500 Dual Channel (2-3-3-6)
Segata 80gb SATA 8.5ms seek
ATI Radeon 9800 Pro(420/720)
Related resources
January 11, 2004 5:37:46 AM

get the P4 3.0c 800fsb HT, there are cheap now and excellent gaming cpu. then get the 3.40 Prescott when it comes. The 2.0a doesn't have hyperthreading and 800fsb.

<b><font color=red>Aquamark3 score: 26,467</b></font color=red> :smile:
<b><font color=blue>Intel P4 2ghz ATI Radeon 9500 pro</b></font color=blue>
January 11, 2004 7:12:02 AM

Ya the 2.6c is what you need, and the price is reasonable. If your dad is into cars at all, tell him what you have is like a corvette with a chevette engine. While the speed increase is only 600mhz the practical gain is almost double. You can also tell him that the P4s are memory bandwidth dependant and that in sync your current setup gives you a max of 4.2 while the 2.6c would yield 6.4.
January 11, 2004 11:06:28 AM

YO YO YO Hold DA Phone. Don't tell your dear old dad anything about anything. In fact you should thank him for being as cool as he already was when he got you the 2.0

That 2.0 Intel chip you have is absolutely as sweet as sugar. Just bump up the clock a little on it.

Any CPU over 1 GHz does the job now for any games or software out. Even a AMD 1.0 GHz Thunderbird still cranks enough data out to run a game like Black Hawk Down and that is one of the laggiest games that came out in 2003.

The Hyper Threading has not yet found a home on home based systems it is still having teething problems!!

As far as the AMD 64 CPU's I have heard good and bad news about them as well mostly good news but if we don't have anything to benchmark them against because Intel is cooking up a new 64 batch not yet released to market then we cannot praise AMD just yet. He who laughs first does not always laugh the old saying goes, Intel could release a 64 that simply makes AMD's effort look like burnt toast.

Use your 2.0 Proudly you have nothing to be ashamed of in that CPU I use for gamming a XP 3200+ and a 2800+ both on a A7N8X Deluxe motherboard and I could not tell the difference in game online in combat game form what computer ran faster or better. I still do very well in fact lead most game maps for score and flag caps with each system.

I am sure your Intel 2.0 with that ATI graphics card you have does exactly the same thing or would.

Barton 3200+ 400MHz
A7N8X Deluxe
2x512 Crucial DDR 400 PC3200
GeForce FX5900
Maxtor DiamondMaxPlus9@80Gig
SONY RW 52x/24x/52x
SONY DVD 16x/40x
January 11, 2004 4:27:21 PM

Dude, if you have a 2.0Ghz, live with it. It'll run things just fine and if u really want to, as has been said, bump up the FSB from 100Mhz-> 133Mhz. Getting something faster now will be a waste of money.

The one and only "Monstrous BULLgarian!"