PDA

View Full Version : 800fsb vs 333fsb



Giantsfan24
06-01-2004, 12:32 PM
You know me. I am getting the amd 3000+ upgrade in this post
http://forums.ubi.com/eve/forums?a=tpc&s=400102&f=49310655&m=620105344&r=463105344#463105344
Now, I see that the Amd will only go up to 333 fsb(400 for the 3200+)
Will this mean that the intel with their 800fsb will run faster?
I still don't fully understand the concept of fsb.
As said in my other post, fps is the issue here, so is the extra fsb found with intel really that much more important? Thanks

Giantsfan24
06-01-2004, 12:32 PM
You know me. I am getting the amd 3000+ upgrade in this post
http://forums.ubi.com/eve/forums?a=tpc&s=400102&f=49310655&m=620105344&r=463105344#463105344
Now, I see that the Amd will only go up to 333 fsb(400 for the 3200+)
Will this mean that the intel with their 800fsb will run faster?
I still don't fully understand the concept of fsb.
As said in my other post, fps is the issue here, so is the extra fsb found with intel really that much more important? Thanks

Huxley_S
06-01-2004, 12:37 PM
If I were u I'd forget about all that and go 64bit. It's the future.

http://www.baseclass.modulweb.dk/69giap/fileadmin/Image_Archive/badges/69giap_badge_huxli.jpg (http://www.baseclass.modulweb.dk/69giap)

FB Music and Campaigns @
http://www.onemorewild.org/huxley

mortoma
06-01-2004, 01:58 PM
Yea, the new AMD 64 bits don't even have a front side bus at all. The memory and CPU communicate between themslves directly, without having to go through the chipset, like older AMDs and Intels.
That makes them equivalent ( right now ) to having a 1600Mhz FSB!!! Kicks Intels ****, lol.

Nub_322Sqn
06-01-2004, 02:15 PM
I went from an AMD 2700+ 333fsb to a P4 3.0 800fsb with Hyperthreading and a performance increase was noticed but not like "Wow look at it fly" but it also gave the jvm.dll error so after a week of tossing memory banks around, re-installing Windows and finding what the hell was wrong I finally ditched the P4 and went with an AMD64 3200+.

Well, the performance increase was noticed this time.
During heavy air/ground activity in missions the framerate increased with nearly 100% as well as over large cities.
All the other components where identical as with the P4 system, only the mainboard and processor where replaced.

The 3200+ AMD64 also has a 1mb cache instead of 512kb.

I am very happy with the AMD64.

http://www.xs4all.nl/~rcma/banners/Nubarusbanner.jpg

arcadeace
06-01-2004, 02:54 PM
I would buy a 'good' system. Be satisfied, enjoy the game...and get on with life.

http://www.onpoi.net/ah/pics/users/222_1082457373_222_1082441075_airaces.jpg

Saturnalia2
06-01-2004, 02:55 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Huxley_S:
If I were u I'd forget about all that and go 64bit. It's the future.
<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Huxley, your picture below the name is friggen hilarious, particularly for a flight sim forum.

Giantsfan24
06-01-2004, 03:15 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>went with an AMD64 3200+.

Well, the performance increase was noticed this time.
During heavy air/ground activity in missions the framerate increased with nearly 100% as well as over large cities.
All the other components where identical as with the P4 system, only the mainboard and processor where replaced.

The 3200+ AMD64 also has a 1mb cache instead of 512kb.

I am very happy with the AMD64.

<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
What kind of memory and vid card do you have? What kind of fps are we talking?

Aaron_GT
06-01-2004, 03:20 PM
"The 3200+ AMD64 also has a 1mb cache instead of 512kb."

The next generation of the P4 (coming soon) is likely to be based on the Pentium-M series and come with 2MB cache.

The AMD64 is the best bang-for-the-buck at the moment, though. The long pipelines of the P4 have proved to be more trouble than they are worth (Pentium-M has a shorter pipeline) and the AMD64 can crank out excellent 32 bit performance.

Nub_322Sqn
06-01-2004, 03:28 PM
I have 1 gig on PC3200 Memory (2x512mb) and a Radeon 9800 Pro 256MB DDRII.

The framerate over large cities is around 32fps and very rarely drops below 30 and if it does it's only for a second or so during extreme activity. (Multiple explosions and such)

I play in 1152x864 32Bit 4xFSAA 8xAF in Perfect mode with the water on 0 in the Conf.ini.

http://www.xs4all.nl/~rcma/banners/Nubarusbanner.jpg

Nub_322Sqn
06-01-2004, 03:30 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Aaron_GT:
"The 3200+ AMD64 also has a 1mb cache instead of 512kb."

The next generation of the P4 (coming soon) is likely to be based on the Pentium-M series and come with 2MB cache.

The AMD64 is the best bang-for-the-buck at the moment, though. The long pipelines of the P4 have proved to be more trouble than they are worth (Pentium-M has a shorter pipeline) and the AMD64 can crank out excellent 32 bit performance.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Do they also have an integrated memory controller like the AMD64 systems or are they still based on the 800Mhz fsb?

http://www.xs4all.nl/~rcma/banners/Nubarusbanner.jpg

JG27_Arklight
06-01-2004, 06:24 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by mortoma:
Yea, the new AMD 64 bits don't even have a front side bus at all. The memory and CPU communicate between themslves directly, without having to go through the chipset, like older AMDs and Intels.
That makes them equivalent ( right now ) to having a 1600Mhz FSB!!! Kicks Intels ****, lol.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>


Then why is mine faster then an FX-53 or an AMD 3400 with my "measely" 1200mhz FSB.

lol

Ark

Everybody is a Christian in a foxhole. -R.I.
------------
2.4C @ 3.6 Default Volt.
ASUS P4C800-E (Rev. 11)
1GB Mushkin PC3500 LvL2 Black @ 2-2-2-5
Radeon 9800XT (Cat. 4.3)
SB Augigy 2 ZS
Antec True550
Zalman 7000A-Cu HSF
4 Case fans/1 120mm Blowhole

Nub_322Sqn
06-02-2004, 02:53 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by JG27_Arklight:
Then why is mine faster then an FX-53 or an AMD 3400 with my "measely" 1200mhz FSB.

lol

Ark

2.4C @ 3.6 Default Volt.
<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Because yours is overclocked.

http://www.xs4all.nl/~rcma/banners/Nubarusbanner.jpg

Obi_Kwiet
06-02-2004, 08:51 AM
Well, technikly Intel has a better clock speed, but that dosen't mean a thing. AMD is WAY more efficent. For instance, my 270$ Athlon 64 3200+ beats Intell's 1200$ 3.4GHz P4EE away on some tests, and even when mine gets beat it's nothing to get excited about. If the 3.4EE and the 64 3200+ were the same price I'd take the 64 because it can run in 64 bit. The extra 930$ is just not worth it. But I digress from your question. Just because the clock speed is lower dosent mean that the CPU is slower. If you want a goood cheap CPU though, get a mobile 2500+ barton for 90$. Those things can be OC'ed through the roof. But make sure you get the moblie version so the multiplier is unlocked. You can get those things past XP 3200+ speeds easilly.