Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

MSI KT7-R and Athlon XP 1700 Clockspeed is 1466

Last response: in CPUs
Share
Anonymous
a b à CPUs
October 20, 2001 4:14:17 PM

Running the MSI KT7 Turbo-R Limited with PC133 and an Athlon XP 1700+. CPU clocking tools like the AMD CpuInfo tell me that the chip is running 1466MHZ. I did update to the latest bios from MSI. The chip is correctly ID as Athlon XP but the CPU speed on any tool says it's running at 1466. Is it my CPU, MB, or am I using the worng tools to check it? My ICQ is : 72257065. Help!
October 20, 2001 4:27:33 PM

The Athlon XP 1700+ does run at 1.466GHz. There's nothing wrong with your system.

AMD technology + Intel technology = Intel/AMD Pentathlon IV; the <b>ULTIMATE</b> PC processor
October 20, 2001 4:43:07 PM

all i can say is LOL,
and DUH:p 

-expact the unexpacted?(next AMD slogan?)

<font color=green>
*******
*K.I.S.S*
*(k)eep (I)t (S)imple (S)tupid*
*******
</font color=green>
Related resources
October 20, 2001 6:06:46 PM

LOL and it begins!
October 20, 2001 7:22:41 PM

To answer the question, there is nothing wrong. THe 1700+ runs at 1.46 Ghz. The Athlon XPs use a rating system, the actualy chip speed is something else. Suposedly, it should perform about the same as the upcoming new P4s at x Mhz. Currently, you're probably running close to a 2 GHZ P4 though.

60 FPS, 70 FPS, 80 FPS Crash!
Daylight comes and I have to go to work :frown:
October 20, 2001 8:01:39 PM

Actually, Bront...
AMD has stated that the XP ratings are relative to T-Bird. So, *in theory* Palomino XP1700+ performs about the same as an Athlon Thunderbird 1700mhz CPU would if there was one.

Whether the numbers actually work out to this or not is difficult to determine since there are no T-Bird 1700mhz CPUs. From what I've seen in benches, AMD is pretty close to the mark in their ratings...maybe off a few tens of mhz...but the rounding makes some sense. Lots easier to remember XP1700+ than XP1678+ or whatever it may be.

Mark-

When all else fails, throw your computer out the window!!!
October 20, 2001 8:47:53 PM

Ahah, looks like you learn something new every day. Must have misread that article (Very likely, I tend to do that). Thanks for the info.

ED

Actualy, it is based on the expected performance of the P4 Northwood chips. Check out http://www4.tomshardware.com/cpu/01q4/011009/athlonxp-1....

60 FPS, 70 FPS, 80 FPS Crash!
Daylight comes and I have to go to work :frown: <P ID="edit"><FONT SIZE=-1><EM>Edited by Bront on 10/20/01 03:59 PM.</EM></FONT></P>
October 20, 2001 8:51:12 PM

Most of the tech sites seemed to overlook that statement by AMD officials. Oh well.

When all else fails, throw your computer out the window!!!
October 20, 2001 9:03:28 PM

Directly from AMD's site...

Q: What do the 1800+, 1700+, 1600+, and 1500+ numbers mean?

A: These are model numbers. AMD will identify the AMD Athlon XP processor using model numbers, as opposed to megahertz, and is introducing 1800+, 1700+, 1600+ and 1500+ versions. Model numbers are designed to communicate the relative application performance among the various AMD Athlon XP processors, as well as communicate the architectural superiority over existing AMD Athlon processors. The AMD Athlon XP processor 1800+ will outperform an Intel Pentium® 4 processor operating at 1.8GHz on a broad array of end-user applications.
AMD Athlon XP processor 1800+ operates at a frequency of 1.53GHz.
AMD Athlon XP processor 1700+ operates at a frequency of 1.47GHz.
AMD Athlon XP processor 1600+ operates at a frequency of 1.40GHz.
AMD Athlon XP processor 1500+ operates at a frequency of 1.33GHz.

http://www.amd.com/us-en/Processors/ProductInformation/...

60 FPS, 70 FPS, 80 FPS Crash!
Daylight comes and I have to go to work :frown:
October 20, 2001 9:10:11 PM

Figures. When in doubt, ignore the manual ;) 

60 FPS, 70 FPS, 80 FPS Crash!
Daylight comes and I have to go to work :frown:
October 20, 2001 9:53:51 PM

yet another geek created!:p 
soon we shall rule the world!!!
spread the word!!:p 

<font color=green>
*******
*K.I.S.S*
*(k)eep (I)t (S)imple (S)tupid*
*******
</font color=green>
Anonymous
a b à CPUs
October 21, 2001 2:02:11 AM

What made you choose that combination of motherboard/ processor anyway? I would almost bet my job on the fact that anyone who visits TomsHardware and posts on the forums would by no know what the PR ratings stand for. Particurlarly someone with experience in system diagnostics. Lets assume now that you bought this processor online (which 99.9% of the people here do), all the dealers on pricewatch list the frequency as well as the PR rating. hmmmm.....

*sniff* *sniff* "stranger? could be a flame from one of em 'experts'"

If not then i appologize.... please feel free to respond to this message in any way you deem necessary and frequent this forum as often as you like. This message was in no way meant to express hostility to you if you are indeed a hardworking computer enthusiast like the other fine forum posters. *bows head*

:eek:  <font color=blue>I for one run Quake 3 on a P133(No MMX)</font color=blue>I have no affiliatioin w/ Intel
October 21, 2001 11:49:28 AM

I have a question for you. How do you like the Msi Kt7 Turbo. I have been looking at the Msi K7T266 Pro2 (MS-6380 V2.0) For it has all the Pci slots I need and a ethernet card built on and its a KT 266a. And On that note I m looking at the pc 2100 or 1600. I'm going to try for three 512 megs of ram. But what getting me is the higher the number the cheaper it is. Like the 1600 is higher price then 2100. Why?
October 21, 2001 12:00:41 PM

yup MSI best board there is, i only buy MSI, you can get raid 0+1 o/b too!
always had MSI never had problams!
you should get it.

and the 1600 costs more to make as they make and ship them in smaller numbers.

<font color=green>
*******
*K.I.S.S*
*(k)eep (I)t (S)imple (S)tupid*
*******
</font color=green>
October 23, 2001 10:36:08 AM

Saw as I hit reply that the next poster took care of it, but I will just make sure it was understood.

PR=tbird performance not p4 performance.

To the origional poster of this thread, your bios is showing you the correct information, before you go ranting claiming fraud, the cpu you have is more powerful than a 2ghz p4, and amd's pr ratings are an attempt to get newbie and the computer illiterate to understand mhz is not everything. So sit back, calm down, and enjoy your ass kicking computer!

~Matisaro~
"The Cash Left In My Pocket,The BEST Benchmark"
~Tbird1.3@1.5~
October 23, 2001 10:42:41 AM

The website you quoted does not say that the pr ratings were derived from p4 comparisions, the register had a story several days ago, quoting AMD as saying that the pr numbers were based on the tbird, the link is in a post I made which would be on page 4 or 5 now. (in this forum)

~Matisaro~
"The Cash Left In My Pocket,The BEST Benchmark"
~Tbird1.3@1.5~
October 23, 2001 1:33:38 PM

Bront's quote from the AMD site showing the XP PR processor list says that the XP PR numbers are intended to indicate the performance relative to earlier AMD chips (Thunderbird) also, Mat.



When all else fails, throw your computer out the window!!!
October 23, 2001 2:54:30 PM

Good, I was the one who broke the news on this site that the pr ratings were infact comparisions to amd chips and I didnt think that my info was wrong.

~Matisaro~
"The Cash Left In My Pocket,The BEST Benchmark"
~Tbird1.3@1.5~
!