View Full Version : Is FSB harder to achieve than raw clock speed?

07-11-03, 02:31 PM
I'm confused by my 1700+ XP Thoroughbred behavior. Shouldn't a CPU be able to hit 2000 MHz (10x at 200 MHz FSB) if that same CPU hits 2075 MHz with another FSB/multipler combination?

- The CPU can hit 2075 MHz with 166 MHz FSB (12.5x)
- The CPU hits only 1700 MHz at 200 MHz FSB (8.5x). 9.0 won't POST.

Is FSB harder to achieve than raw clock speed?

- AMD Athlon Thoroughbread XP 1700+ JIUHB
- ASUS A7N8X Deluxe v2.0/BIOS 1005
- Mushkin DDR PC3500 2.5-3-3-6 Level II Black

07-11-03, 05:12 PM
Its a combo of both highest fsb and highest mutli, stable that will give best results. Remember the cpu clock is fsb*multi, and I think both have seperate limits on the cpu, this is my understanding anyways, maybe Im wrong :p

Your cpu has a fsb of 133, so it already is OC a good deal, as much as a Barton2500+ @ 200fsb more or less.

Im guessing pci and agp buses are locked, and you have raised the volts on the ram a good deal? Maybe run memtest86 also make sure your ram is 100%

The Baron
07-11-03, 06:07 PM
You monkey with RAM voltage?

08-08-03, 12:32 AM
Depends what your memory speed is at. If you have it sync (memory also running at 200) then your memory may be holding you back. Try lowering the timings.