Ok, iam just wondering if the t-bird 1.3 gig really exsists? i have an abit kt7a 133 mainboard (with a 1.1gig tbird @ 1.4 gig) problem is these boards and others only have a multiplier of 12.5 NOT 13, so the question is how would they get the right multiplier / fsb setting to achieve 1300mhz exactly. 9.77 multiplier doesnt work 10x133 gives 1333mhz, so i guess this is all just hype or there must be some new mobos coming on the market to support this processor????????? HMMMMMMmmmm very strange... ;o)-
come on guys and girls , show me a cpu where they round down the mhz 33 !!! they round down 1 mhz but thats about it. look at intel with their 733mhz 866mhz on so on cpus. they dont call an 866 a 850 do they...... my bet is that the t-bird 1.3 gig is fake their is no standard fsb and multiplier they can use to get 1.3gig , i guess we will have to wait and see..... )
Yep its fake. IT has to be. OH yeah, I forgot to tell you I think that texas and california are fake too. I've never seen them. They can't be there...... same with South America. It's just media hype..!
My guess is that since switching over to the GHz ratings, the .0anything doesn't matter anymore. Thus 1.33GHz is just listed as a 1.3GHz. Had it still been listed in MHz, then I'm sure it'd be listed as 1330MHz ... but that'd just be silly.
I dunno. Beats me.
I do however have to wonder if this 1.3GHz chip exists. If it does, it'd HAVE to be by doing something like the .13Micron etching. Or something different anyway. I mean if the 1.3GHz chip were possible by means of the exact same production methods used for the others, then overclockers would have gotten chips that fast by now. The fact that it's not that easy suggests that if it does exist, AMD is certainly up to something new.
So I can see where there is a high probability for believing that it is a fake. But since AMD has GOT to be under pressure by now, I can see where they'd be doing just about anything to try and make a faster CPU.
Though, you'd think if that were the case, they'd be releasing a 1.5 GHz CPU to match Intel instead of just a seemingly still behind 1.3GHz.
(And when I say things like seemingly still behind, I mean that it appears to be slower by GHz rating, not by actual performance ... as we all know where the actual performance levels are.)
I suppose that could be the case too. But I thought that AMD was really trying to get away from their quaint 100MHz FSB and get everything over to the 133MHz FSB. If such were the case, then it'd be odd that their new crowning CPU would use the old 100MHz FSB.
Yeah, but from what I've heard (I can only go by that since I don't have a thousand chips laying around to test overclocking with) it's more a matter of luck to get it that high. And a lot of people say they're overclocking that high, but their computer won't even boot up into Windows and run for more than 10 minutes without crashing.
And, of course, to get it that high requires non standard voltage settings as well as a superior cooling solution. Which denotes the whole thing as an overclocked CPU.
I can't imagine that AMD would be so hard-pressed to compete for the fastest CPU that they'd release a chip that's obviously an overclocked chip. Intel tried it and everyone laughed. If AMD went and did the same thing, how could we not laugh at them too?
The only other possability for the existance of this chip that I can think of is that AMD is testing each chip that they produce set to an overclocked setting to see if they work without raising the voltage. And if they do, then they re-label it at 1.3GHz. And if the chip can't do it (like most wouldn't) then they just keep the 1.2GHz label (or whatever it was supposed to have been) on it.
But if that's how they're making 1.3GHz chips, then there must really be very few in existance since 1.2GHz seemed to have pushed them to their limits, just as the P3 seems to be limited to 1GHz.