Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

READ THIS !!: 'How the P4 finally beat the Athlon'

Last response: in CPUs
Share
April 5, 2002 5:20:24 PM

Calling all hardcore forum posters ! I highly recommend reading this <A HREF="http://www.emulators.com/docs/pentium_4.htm" target="_new">artical</A> The artical itself is written in an unconventional manner and to be quite honest the author has been quite blunt in expressing his views.

Before you class the author as a troll I would like to point out he has supported the Athlon in previous articals. I have to admit I happen to agree with <b>80%</b> of the artical, the other 20% I think he has gotten wrong especially the bit about the Mhz and PR rating (I shall be pointing other errors in later posts).

All in all I think this is a great artical and quite plainly explains what has happened to the Athlon and P4 as well as issues surrounding the CPUs over the past 2 years. The artical also raises some great topics for discussion. I would be interested in hearing what Raystonn and Matisaro have to say about it.

The artical itself is 10 pages long and also talks about PR rating, 64 bit and stability. It is a very interesting read indeed...I was especially interested in his benchmarking methods of the Athlon and P4 using low level machine instruction language.

I am currently reading the artical more carefully and will be commenting on it further when I have more time...

<font color=purple>Ladies and Gentlemen, its...Hammer Time !</font color=purple>
April 5, 2002 5:44:03 PM

i hope you realized that you spelled "article" wrong....8 times....

<b><font color=red>ATI</font color=red>'s drivers are like a broken faucet, they both keep on leaking...</b> :cool:
April 5, 2002 6:16:39 PM

Long read but some good info on his views and why he has them.
Related resources
April 5, 2002 6:32:55 PM

It was a pretty interesting read. Not much new to learn, but it was put together well to make a few convincing points.

I can't help but feel that a few points were neglected though, such as you still can buy an Athlon with PC133 RAM if you really want to. Or that you can make heat sink installations on the Athlon easier by either using a copper sheath to protect the die, or a heat sink that mounts with posts instead of that stupid clippy. Or that proper case ventilation (such as at least two case fans) should be used regardless of it being an AMD or Intel system. I've got an P3-750 box sitting right next to me that was having stability problems until I introduced a second case fan. I'm pretty sure that it was video card related though. Damn Matrox.

In any event, he still did make quite a few good points. And considering that Intel hasn't even released their 133MHz FSB Northwoods yet, I think he has an excellent point about AMD's PR rating schema. My other favorite points were the lack of any real innovation into the Athlon core, and that AMD is putting too many eggs into a single basket with Hammer. Oh, and that 64-bit, while neato-keen for scientific software developers like me, is going to be generally wasted on the average user for years. Still, it's about time someone made a decent stand for it, or else it wouldn't become commonplace until even later.

I think I'm generally rambling now. Blame it on a company BBQ totally killing my professional mood today. :)  Me want more cheeseburgers!

<pre>Join PETT.(People for Equal Treatment of Trolls)
Trolls:Keeping bridges clean 'n safe.</pre><p>
April 5, 2002 7:01:21 PM

Everybody feel free to call me an idiot for thinking this is the same article as before. :frown:

Interesting article, it's odd that he is so extreme with bashing AMD's mistakes, and he was so extreme bashing Intel's mistakes earlier. Usually people that are willing to change sides (i.e. open-minded) aren't as vocal in their opinions. Well said, even though a few things were exaggerated.

<font color=blue>If you don't buy Windows, then the terrorists have already won!</font color=blue> - Microsoft<P ID="edit"><FONT SIZE=-1><EM>Edited by FatBurger on 04/05/02 12:10 PM.</EM></FONT></P>
April 5, 2002 7:17:42 PM

Thanks for pointing it out.

<font color=purple>Ladies and Gentlemen, its...Hammer Time !</font color=purple>
April 5, 2002 7:20:55 PM

Well, it is an interesting article, and in the last 4 months or so intel has been moving faster, due to the .13 micron shift before amd, I do feel however that the amd chip still offeres a better price/performance solution than intel, and when the tbred comes they can ramp clockspeeds to compete till hammer.


But there is no doubt that p4 has the fastest chip out today.

:wink: The Cash Left In My Pocket,The BEST Benchmark :wink:
April 5, 2002 7:35:22 PM

Quote:
I do feel however that the amd chip still offeres a better price/performance solution than intel, and when the tbred comes they can ramp clockspeeds to compete till hammer.


Here's the way I see it. There are three target markets for the DIYer.

#1 is the person who wants the best performance at stock, price is not an issue. Examples would typically stick to people who work in sound studios, do video editing, etc. Let's say 5% of the market. For these people, clearly the P4 2.4GHz is the best option.

#2 is probably the majority of the people on this board, who want the best performance with overclocking, on a decent budget. Probably around 45% of the market. Currently the 1.6A is the best option.

#3 is the people who don't overclock and want the best performance on a budget. For these people, the Athlon is definitely the way to go. This would make up the other half of the market.

<font color=blue>If you don't buy Windows, then the terrorists have already won!</font color=blue> - Microsoft
April 5, 2002 7:40:31 PM

He has had to emphasise the facts and current situation more cause he has received threatening emails / hate mail from various Hard core AMD fans. Again it is up to AMD to prove themselves, Intel is well established respected company its No. 1. You can hardly critisise Intel for being No. 1...they must be doing something right...Intel have nothing to prove they just have to ensure they keep thier exisiting customers happy.

AMD however has everything to prove and it is expected that they will be critised even more because of that. The tradegy is that AMD is starting to crack...they basically cannot deliver when its crunch time. At the moment they are doing an extremely good job holding the fort but Intel will eventually manage to break down the doors, I just hope they can hangon until Hammer arrives, then we will really see how good AMD's design team and execution plan is.

As I see it all AMD need is a at least 2 1st tier companies to support thier Hammer processor only then will bluechip companies take them seriously. At the moment I dont think AMD have the infrastructure to provide the level of support large corporations are demanding these days.

<font color=purple>Ladies and Gentlemen, its...Hammer Time !</font color=purple>
April 5, 2002 7:45:20 PM

finally a hardcore AMDfanboy had to come clean, LoL that was a fun read.

"<b>AMD/VIA!</b>...you are <i>still</i> the weakest link, good bye!"
April 5, 2002 7:49:10 PM

Yes AMD has gained acceptance in the euthuisast market where price/performnce ratio is an issue, hats off to them, they deserve it ! But at the moment I dont really think they will gain any more market share in that particular area.

The next challenge for AMD is the enterprise sector this is where I personally AMD are likely to make the biggest mistakes and if that happens AMD will remain in a rut for a very long time. I really hope they can crack this market, I really do.

<font color=purple>Ladies and Gentlemen, its...Hammer Time !</font color=purple>
April 5, 2002 7:49:39 PM

FatBurger, I think you left out groups #4 and #5:

#4) People who own an aging system and want to either upgrade it or use as much as they can out of it to save a buck but have never built a system from scratch in their life. For them, the best answer is <i>usually</i> a P3 because chances are they were running an old P3-Kat and don't want to change their mobo. Of course, with a little help these people can often upgrade to an Athlon.

#5) People who have irrational fears of AMD. I've run into people like this, and no matter how much you try to convince them that an Athlon is 100% compatible and stable, they just don't believe.

Strangely, I haven't met anyone yet who actually fears an Intel system. Is disgusted by, yes. Refuses to build one, yes. Is afraid it will burst into flames and burn down their house, no.

<pre>Join PETT.(People for Equal Treatment of Trolls)
Trolls:Keeping bridges clean 'n safe.</pre><p>
April 5, 2002 7:52:04 PM

I was just trying to keep it simple, I could do a dozen groups if I really wanted, but there's not really a need to IMO.

<font color=blue>If you don't buy Windows, then the terrorists have already won!</font color=blue> - Microsoft
April 5, 2002 7:55:37 PM

I am not a hardcore AMD fan...I prefer AMD nor Intel I simply say it like it is no strings attached.

Unlike you I prefer not to insult my own intelligence by giving a one sided arguement all of the time.

<font color=purple>Ladies and Gentlemen, its...Hammer Time !</font color=purple>
April 5, 2002 7:58:01 PM

This is true. I thought at least #4 was worth mentioning though because I've run into family members and friends with that mindset of upgrading the CPU and/or memory but not the motherboard so many times that I've considered writing a web site devoted to the topic.

But then I realize I don't really give a damn what they do and just let the inevitable insanity begin. After all, life gets boring when everything is logical and goes as expected. :) 

<pre>Join PETT.(People for Equal Treatment of Trolls)
Trolls:Keeping bridges clean 'n safe.</pre><p>
April 5, 2002 7:59:41 PM

A good stance to take. After all, if there was only one side to an argument, then it wouldn't have taken place in the first place. :) 

<pre>Join PETT.(People for Equal Treatment of Trolls)
Trolls:Keeping bridges clean 'n safe.</pre><p>
April 5, 2002 8:10:05 PM

Interesting article, and he has some good points.

1. The P4 FINALY has programs that are being correctly optimized for it.

2. The P4 FINALY has the speed it was suposed to have gotten in the first place.

3. The HSF is easy to install.

4. It runs realy cool.

5. It OCs well.

6. AMD is missing several of it's scedualed release dates of late.

7. The 64-bit part of Hammer won't be adding anything extra to the table for several years.

8. It takes time for new CPU architecture to actualy be used on a wide scale.

Points I question him on though.

1. Is the P4 running on DDR ram that much of an issue with the price decrease of RDRAM and the proven improved performance?

2. He's having stability issues with the Athlon XP that he wasn't having with previous Athlons... Wasn't it more the other way around, with chipsets maturing to be stabler with the more recient CPUs?

3. His PR points about %. Yes, % is different when you have a different referenced starting point (1500-2100 vs 1333-1733). Also, he pointed out earlier that mhz isn't what matters in earlier articles, but now he plays the MHZ game with performance increases being = to Mhz increases.

4. He missed part of the point of OCing the P4. It's not that you can get a 2.2 to 2.6, but that you can get a 1.6 to 2.4 that is impressive.

5. He discusses the price of the dual CPU systems, but fails to discus the price of the single CPU systems.

Now, how will AMD fair with the new T-bread? It depends. DDR ram is more expensive than it's been in a while, and could be quite expensive to get a system that would OC well, which is one of the main draws of the t-bread. I'm cash poor, otherwise I'd think about getting a new Mainboard and T-Bread after they came out and seeing how far I could push it, but I also only have PC2100 memory (Granted, it's Micron CAS 2.0, so it might go far), so I might be limited in that aspect.

As for Hammer, it hopefully will be everything it promises to be in 32 Bit coding. It might have a bit of a jump on the 64 bit market because there are some other 64 bit OSs out for the Itanium, and some desire to produce and use them already. But, it will still take some time to actualy be usefull to the general public.

Trollin' trollin' trollin', keep them doggies postin', my fingers are swollen, Rawhide!
April 5, 2002 8:11:41 PM

I think he ment the article writer.

Trollin' trollin' trollin', keep them doggies postin', my fingers are swollen, Rawhide!
April 5, 2002 8:12:43 PM

I'm an Intel/AMD/VIA/Nvidia/ATI/Matrox/W.Digital/Maxtor/IBM/Seagate/Fujitsu/Phillips/Turtle beach/Logitech/Altec Lansing/Klipch/Asus/MSI/Abit/ECS/Iwill/Samsung
/Cruical/Kingmax/Corsair/ALi/SiS/Microsoft/Palm/Xerox/Canon/Iomega
/Pioneer/Sony/HP/Enermax/Antec/NEC/Creative/3dfx/Hercules fanboy, if anyone is curious. :tongue:


I dare someone to put all those companies into one "*_Man" name for me. :wink:

AMD technology + Intel technology = Intel/AMD Pentathlon IV; the <b>ULTIMATE</b> PC processor
April 5, 2002 8:20:18 PM

No I think he meant me..after all I was the famous 'Creeper' no so long ago.

<font color=purple>Ladies and Gentlemen, its...Hammer Time !</font color=purple>
April 5, 2002 8:40:04 PM

Very interesting article, it did bring out the hidden faults I failed to see in AMD though. I do agree now Intel has finally done what the P4 should be seen at. However the next step is increasing the IPC completly, with Prescott, and that will prove once and for all the REAL P4, not a hidden low performance per clock processor that needed 1.6GHZ more than the P3 to finally show extreme performance.
Also does anyone have any benchmarks showing how much recompiled P4 app performs better on P4? I'd like a comparison with a non compiled P4 app, and then with compiled, against a similar clocked AthlonXP, to actually see how compiling helps.
However I too find his abnormal AthlonXP stability problems weird, I mean first of all, has he set the FSB to 133? If so, maybe the A7A was an old Ali chipset rev, and thus was not fully stable. He should have used known stable and well-performing mobos like an Epox 8KHA+.
His arguments about DDR vs RDRAM are a bit flawed. RDRAM with PC1066 does very well, and DDR 333 does too, but until DDR400, or Dual Channel PC2700, DDR is not the best thing for P4. The worse and most uneducated comment was how DDR will be better with speeds above 2GHZ. Now that is plain dumb.

The rest is up to AMD, and I do congratulate Matisaro for admitting some faults as well as knowing some logical assertions to both processors. Indeed Tbred WHEN OUT, should have a good competition is properly handled. Until then who here is really buying a new CPU in the next month except Crashman?

--
For the first time, Hookers are hooked on Phonics!!
April 5, 2002 8:51:36 PM

Quote:
Strangely, I haven't met anyone yet who actually fears an Intel system. Is disgusted by, yes. Refuses to build one, yes. Is afraid it will burst into flames and burn down their house, no.

Actualy, I have.

Met someone who had lost 4 Intel systems to various issues. All the systems had burned out (One P4, the others were PII and PIII). one or two of them were HSF issues, one I think was a motherboard issue (not sure about that one), and I'm pretty sure the P4 was a power surge issue that fried something.

I don't blame intel for any of these, but he does. I think he posted here once.

Trollin' trollin' trollin', keep them doggies postin', my fingers are swollen, Rawhide!
April 5, 2002 8:54:58 PM

You forgot Hercules :frown:

<font color=blue>If you don't buy Windows, then the terrorists have already won!</font color=blue> - Microsoft
April 5, 2002 8:58:25 PM

Opps, how could I forget! I've edited it.

AMD technology + Intel technology = Intel/AMD Pentathlon IV; the <b>ULTIMATE</b> PC processor
April 5, 2002 8:58:39 PM

Hardware_Man
LoveHW_Man
LoveAllHW_Man

KG

<b>"Hey! It compiles! Ship it!"</b>
April 5, 2002 8:58:46 PM

Quote:
4. It runs realy cool.


It does?

Quote:
6. AMD is missing several of it's scedualed release dates of late.


I thought I was the only person that noticed this, glad to see I'm not.

Quote:
1. Is the P4 running on DDR ram that much of an issue with the price decrease of RDRAM and the proven improved performance?


Now it's not. When there were no DDR platforms, it would've made a difference. However, by the time they got here, price didn't matter as much anymore.

Quote:
4. He missed part of the point of OCing the P4. It's not that you can get a 2.2 to 2.6, but that you can get a 1.6 to 2.4 that is impressive.


I agree with that, but the point of the article is to show the architecture of the two CPUs. In this case, the maximum clockspeed is what's important, not the % overclock.

<font color=blue>If you don't buy Windows, then the terrorists have already won!</font color=blue> - Microsoft
April 5, 2002 9:01:38 PM

Quote:
#2 is probably the majority of the people on this board, who want the best performance with overclocking, on a decent budget. Probably around 45% of the market. Currently the 1.6A is the best option.



But not the only viable option, one can get a 1700+ for 40 less than the p4 and overclock it to 2100+ speeds which while slower than the average 1.6 p4, it offers both acceptable performance and a killer upgrade possibility, for 40 less.

:wink: The Cash Left In My Pocket,The BEST Benchmark :wink:
April 5, 2002 9:04:55 PM

That choice can only get better with a Tbred 1700+. But I think they will get the 1800+ out, which is still gonna be much less hot, resulting in the end with an excellent OC. I am sure you'll pick this one up if you want to personally take the FB challenge and further than his.

--
For the first time, Hookers are hooked on Phonics!!
April 5, 2002 9:08:14 PM

Doesn't the P4 Northwood run cool?

Also, just a question. AMD has their own chipset coming out for hammer, but will anyone else? Anyone heard anything about what any new post-athlon chipsets will be out there?

Trollin' trollin' trollin', keep them doggies postin', my fingers are swollen, Rawhide!
April 5, 2002 9:14:36 PM

He accidentally put creative in there too. :tongue:
April 5, 2002 9:18:34 PM

Intially motherboard manufacturers will use the AMD 8000 chipset. VIA, SIS and Nivida are all currently developing their own chipsets for Hammer. VIA are likley to release thier own chipset first...probably followed by Nivida.

Sorry going off on a tangent now...What suprises me is that AMD have delibrately chosen not to pursue a faster FSB or extra cache for the Athlon. Believe me if AMD wanted to remain on top of Intel Throughbred would have supported 333FSB and have extra cache. But it is obvious they have taken a strategic stance instead of a competitive one...its all part of AMD's longterm plan..whatever that is. Only time will tell.

<font color=purple>Ladies and Gentlemen, its...Hammer Time !</font color=purple>
April 5, 2002 9:25:20 PM

Quote:
Sorry going off on a tangent now...What suprises me is that AMD have delibrately chosen not to pursue a faster FSB or extra cache for the Athlon. Believe if AMD wanted to remain on top of Intel Throughbred would have supported 333FSB and have extra cache. But it is obvious they have taken a strategic stance instead of a competitive one...its all part of AMD's longterm plan..whatever that is. Only time will tell.

The simple reason for that is that it would require people to buy whole new machines, and AMD and several other companies to design new motherboards. Also, DDR2700 is much more expensive than DDR2100. AMD is looking to keep it's CPU and component prices down, as it's one of the few clear advantages they have over the P4.

Yes, most chipsets can go to 166, but it's a Bios tweek. It might be a simple bios flash, but some chipsets might not do well with it.

Also, on their end, when the hammer comes out on a 166 DDR bus, it will make it look that much faster compaired to the Athlon.

Trollin' trollin' trollin', keep them doggies postin', my fingers are swollen, Rawhide!
April 5, 2002 9:31:51 PM

I thought the Hammer does not use a direct FSB since HyperTransport runs around half or more of the clock speed?

--
For the first time, Hookers are hooked on Phonics!!
April 5, 2002 9:48:04 PM

Quote:
But not the only viable option, one can get a 1700+ for 40 less than the p4 and overclock it to 2100+ speeds which while slower than the average 1.6 p4, it offers both acceptable performance and a killer upgrade possibility, for 40 less.


I never said it was the only good option, just the current best.

<font color=blue>If you don't buy Windows, then the terrorists have already won!</font color=blue> - Microsoft
April 5, 2002 11:01:24 PM

In reply to:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
But not the only viable option, one can get a 1700+ for 40 less than the p4 and overclock it to 2100+ speeds which while slower than the average 1.6 p4, it offers both acceptable performance and a killer upgrade possibility, for 40 less.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Can you take All available 1700+ to 2100+. And if you can do you have to spend the $40 you saved on special fan, heatsink, power supply, certified memory etc.

KG

<b>"Hey! It compiles! Ship it!"</b>
April 5, 2002 11:04:10 PM

You dont need certified ram.

Most if not all 1700+'s hit 1733(2100+) most even hit 1800 aircooled.

THere are very good hsf's for 10 bucks.(my alpha pal8045 was 29)



:wink: The Cash Left In My Pocket,The BEST Benchmark :wink:
April 5, 2002 11:05:10 PM

And not all p4's can hit 2.4ghz, if you have rdram which is bad your overclock may be limited to 133fsb, which is 2.1 GHZ IIRC< which a 1.73ghz axp will out perform.

:wink: The Cash Left In My Pocket,The BEST Benchmark :wink:
April 5, 2002 11:10:20 PM

In Response to:
-------------------------------------
What suprises me is that AMD have delibrately chosen not
to pursue a faster FSB or extra cache for the Athlon. Believe me if AMD wanted to remain on top of Intel Throughbred would have supported 333FSB and have extra cache. But it is obvious they have taken a strategic stance instead of a competitive one...its all part of AMD's longterm plan..whatever that is. Only time will tell.
-------------------------------------

Do you know how much resources are needed to add extra cache and support higher FSB. Also, why extend an already outdated processor when the new (hammer) is just around the corner. If they decide to do this they will have to pull resources off of Hammer and put it towards Athlon which would delay hammer. In a way AMD is doing the right thing not to do anything else with Athlon other then move it to new process. This will keep them competative if they deliver it on time. Otherwise, they got to do something fast because, intel has caught up and passed AMD in the race. And guess what 533FSB is just around the corner.

KG

<b>"Hey! It compiles! Ship it!"</b>
April 5, 2002 11:20:14 PM

Only at full speed memory, anyone who bumps their RDRAM to 3/4 can hit much higher speeds easily and still have more bandwidth than DDR at max speeds.

<font color=blue>If you don't buy Windows, then the terrorists have already won!</font color=blue> - Microsoft
April 5, 2002 11:22:28 PM

Quote:
Only at full speed memory, anyone who bumps their RDRAM to 3/4 can hit much higher speeds easily and still have more bandwidth than DDR at max speeds.


If you are at 3/4 at 133fsb you are running rdram at stock 800, if the rdram is not good it wont go much higher than stock, limiting your overclock. If you get a bad stick of samsung(and it does happen, for any brand) which wont do a mhz over 800, or even 820 ish etc, then you will be [-peep-] out of luck.

:wink: The Cash Left In My Pocket,The BEST Benchmark :wink:
April 5, 2002 11:25:52 PM

But you'll still have better performance than anything but an extremely OCed DDR platform.

And yes, you can get DDR that doesn't do 1MHz over the rated speed too.

<font color=blue>If you don't buy Windows, then the terrorists have already won!</font color=blue> - Microsoft
April 5, 2002 11:27:13 PM

I totally agree, however your 1.6a is now a 2.1ghhz p4, which cost you 40 more than a 1700+ axp which could hit 2100+, regardless of ddr, that was my point.

Not all p4 1.6a's hit 2.4ghz

:wink: The Cash Left In My Pocket,The BEST Benchmark :wink:
April 5, 2002 11:36:13 PM

My 1.6a is 2.1GHz? When did that happen? You breaking into my house and changing my clock settings again?

BTW, I've never seen you on Tribes, you actually play?

<font color=blue>If you don't buy Windows, then the terrorists have already won!</font color=blue> - Microsoft
April 5, 2002 11:40:10 PM

Not you personally, your in the general term describing a p4 buyer.


as for tribes, I play mohaa and now jedi knight 2 outcast, havent played tribes in a long time.

:wink: The Cash Left In My Pocket,The BEST Benchmark :wink:
April 5, 2002 11:42:35 PM

Just because the RAM isn't synchronous doesn't mean that you don't have better performance. The CPU is still clocked higher, and the RAM becomes more effective. I have very close to the same memory bandwidth in Sandra at 116MHz with a CPU at 155MHz as I did when both were at 133MHz.

EDIT:
I've been playing MOHAA, JKII and Serious Sam 2, but I still gotta keep up with Tribes or I'll fall behind.

<font color=blue>If you don't buy Windows, then the terrorists have already won!</font color=blue> - Microsoft<P ID="edit"><FONT SIZE=-1><EM>Edited by FatBurger on 04/05/02 04:43 PM.</EM></FONT></P>
April 5, 2002 11:46:07 PM

Your not following me burger.

If your rdram tops out at 820mhz, then even at a 3/4 setting the FASTEST fsb you can have is 138 giving you a final clockspeed of 2208 (138x16), this is the top speed your system can ever reach because you cannot unlock the p4 or up the fsb further.

This will be outperformed by an athlonxp2100+ which if you reach by buying a 1700+(and overclocking it) will cost you 40 less than the p4.



:wink: The Cash Left In My Pocket,The BEST Benchmark :wink:
April 5, 2002 11:48:27 PM

If the RDRAM tops out at 820 and your CPU has no limitation, then at 3/4 speed you can hit 273 on your CPU.

How is your RAM limiting your CPU if you're at 3/4 speed?



EDIT:
I'm trying to chat with you, BTW :tongue:

<font color=blue>If you don't buy Windows, then the terrorists have already won!</font color=blue> - Microsoft<P ID="edit"><FONT SIZE=-1><EM>Edited by FatBurger on 04/05/02 04:49 PM.</EM></FONT></P>
April 6, 2002 3:16:23 AM

A: I noticed, but you never came back to the irc room after I pmed you.


AS for the fsb thing.

At 100fsb your ram is running at 4/4 at 800mhz correct.

1t 133fsb your ram is running at 4/4 at 1066mhz, right.

This is too high for your ram, so you go to 3/4 putting you at 133fsb pc800 rdram.

If your ram can only do 820mhz, then you can only increase the fsb 5 more ticks before you reach 820(right).

Thus your ram is limiting you.


AM I wrong?

:wink: The Cash Left In My Pocket,The BEST Benchmark :wink:
April 6, 2002 3:32:22 AM

No, you're right. But it would have to be incredibly crappy RAM, which could also happen on an Athlon system.

<font color=blue>If you don't buy Windows, then the terrorists have already won!</font color=blue> - Microsoft
April 6, 2002 3:34:50 AM

::finishes off the debate::

It could happen on an athlon, but because you can unlock crappy ram will never limit your cpus overclock, with the p4 you do not have that option.

Game set match.

:wink: The Cash Left In My Pocket,The BEST Benchmark :wink:
!