Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

Overclocking - Multiplier vs FSB

Last response: in CPUs
Share
June 4, 2001 9:44:43 PM

Ok, here it goes...
I recently purchased an Abit KT7a-RAID MB, and am soon to buy the processor to go with it. I would like to go with a high-end AMD, but I'm a bit stuck as to how to proceed. Here are my two options:

1. Buy a 1.33GHz Athlon with a 266 FSB (or 133, technically). Up the multiplier to the max of 12.5.

2. Buy a 1.3GHz Athlon with a 200 FSB (or 100, technically). Up the FSB to 266 (since you can change the processor's bus separate from the memory and PCI bus).

Opinions please :) 

Apple? Macintosh? What are these strange words you speak?
June 4, 2001 9:47:14 PM

FSB will give you better proformace. If you PCI card can take a highier bus go for it. FSB gives you more bandwith and MHz. Where multipiers only give more MHz.

Nice Intel and AMD users get a Cookie.... :smile: Yummy :smile:
Anonymous
a b à CPUs
a b K Overclocking
June 4, 2001 10:50:02 PM

FSB is the way to go

--call it what you wish, with this machine I can make mercury flow in 3 directions at once--
Related resources
Can't find your answer ? Ask !
a b à CPUs
a b K Overclocking
June 4, 2001 10:51:18 PM

Better idea-buy the 1333 and overclock the BUS to 150, giving you even better results. Use PC 150.

Cast not thine pearls before the swine
Anonymous
a b à CPUs
a b K Overclocking
June 4, 2001 11:24:12 PM

Go save some money and get a retail 1.0ghz 266 fsb, like i did. More than likely, you'll be able to overclock it to 1.5ghz easily. (150*10.0--but get a good HSF, unless you live in an extremely cold place, then the stock HSF can get you up to 1.4ghz-like me).

<font color=blue>"640 Kilobytes of computer memory ought to be enough for anybody." - Bill Gates, 1981</font color=blue>
a b à CPUs
a b K Overclocking
June 5, 2001 5:52:54 AM

Oh, without even changing the multiplier, you can get the 1ghz/100FSB (200DDR) Axia, and then simply increase the bus to 150.

Cast not thine pearls before the swine
Anonymous
a b à CPUs
a b K Overclocking
June 5, 2001 10:24:40 AM

This is highly coincidental. I was going to post asking a question on the effect of overclocking on the life of a processor.

From my reading on the Forums, I know of 3 methods of overclocking an Athlon Thunderbird:

1) Overclocking the FSB
2) Manipulating the multiplier for higher MHz, and
3) Manipulating the voltage of the processor core.


To the experienced overclocker and those knowledgeable in the matter, how do these 3 methods, when used individually, affect the life-span of your processor. How does a a combination of the 3 methods affect the life-span?

Thanks in advance to all replies.

A nice day to all.
Anonymous
a b à CPUs
a b K Overclocking
June 5, 2001 12:51:27 PM

No offence, but I think you need to read some more before beginning to overclock.

Anyway, there are only two ways to overclock a cpu:
1) increase fsb
2) increase multiplier
CPU speed is fsb x mulitplier. Increasing the voltage is a way to stabilize a cpu at higher speeds. It will not make a Tbird (or any cpu) faster by itself.

Intel cpu's can only be overclocked by upping the FSB. Their mulitplier is locked, and there is no way around it (except for some rare engineering examples).

Some AMD cpu's are factory unlocked, meaning you can either overclock them by increasing the fsb or the multiplier, or both. Those that are locked, can be unlocked relatively easy by closing the L1 bridges (the famous 'pencil job').

As for life-span.. there is no easy answer, and in fact, I dont think anybody really knows. Common sense would tell me increasing the voltage *will* reduce the life span. Overclocking it without increasing voltage, might.. but then again, there is no real difference between a Duron that was sold as 600 Mhz, and runs perfectly @800 with std voltage, and a Duron 800. So, while a Duron 600@600 may last longer than a 800, you're probably still looking at 30+ years.

As long as you dont exagerate the Vcore (ie, not 2v+ for a Tbird), and you keep the temps down to a reasonable level, I dont think you will live to see the end of your cpu. I mean, who cares wether it lasts 10 or 30 years ? Also, no one has ever owned a 500+ Mhz cpu for more than 10 years, so no one really knows.

The only thing that may really shorten the lifespan of an (overclocked) cpu, is running it without hsf. You're talking seconds then ;-) Crushing the core by mis-installing a hsf is another way to make sure your cpu wont last. All other practices seem quite safe.


---- Owner of the only Dell computer with a AMD chip
Anonymous
a b à CPUs
a b K Overclocking
June 5, 2001 4:58:36 PM

1) yes
2) yes
3) no, the voltage is not really used to actually make the CPU clock speed faster. It is used to help make it more stable while overclocking by either upping or lowering the voltage.

concerning processor life, I agree. If my CPU running at stock 1.0ghz is suppose to last me at least 5 years, that would be great. But if I overclock it to 1.4ghz and it takes away a year or two of its life, I don't really care---because by then, a 1.0ghz would cost like $50.

<font color=blue>"640 Kilobytes of computer memory ought to be enough for anybody." - Bill Gates, 1981</font color=blue>
a b à CPUs
a b K Overclocking
June 5, 2001 11:57:59 PM

I have never seen the processor life shortened significantly. It either works for a long time or fries quickly, depending on what you did wrong.

Cast not thine pearls before the swine
!