AMD64 1600Mhz FSB or 333MHz FSB?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Albert Grennock
  • Start date Start date
A

Albert Grennock

I see a PC and it says it's FSB is 1600Mhz, however elsewhere
I think I have seen the same PC and it says it's FSB is 333Mhz
Which is quite a difference.
Can anyone explain this?

Also another example is an AMD 64 3000+ with a FSB of 1600Mhz
and a Semperon 3000+ with a FSB of just 333Mhz (I have those
in a catalogue right in front of me), the difference in price of the two
systems is small (about 10%), so what is going on ith such apparently
huge increases in bus speeds. I mean if you can get 4 times the speed
for just a 10% increase in price the slower system would be virtually
unsaleable one would think. I suspect in reality the two systems are
similar in performance. Can anyone shed some light on this?
 
Albert said:
I see a PC and it says it's FSB is 1600Mhz, however elsewhere
I think I have seen the same PC and it says it's FSB is 333Mhz
Which is quite a difference.
Can anyone explain this?
Click to expand...

I think you're confusing FSB bus speed with CPU speed.
Also another example is an AMD 64 3000+ with a FSB of 1600Mhz
and a Semperon 3000+ with a FSB of just 333Mhz (I have those
in a catalogue right in front of me), the difference in price of the two
systems is small (about 10%), so what is going on ith such apparently
huge increases in bus speeds. I mean if you can get 4 times the speed
for just a 10% increase in price the slower system would be virtually
unsaleable one would think. I suspect in reality the two systems are
similar in performance. Can anyone shed some light on this?
Click to expand...

There are several AMD64 3000+ CPU's, none of which have a "FSB" of over
200MHz. The actual CPU speed is 2000MHz, derived from a bus clock at
200MHz. The one I have, ADA3000AEP4AX, can use PC3200 DDR memory, which
runs at an equivalent speed of 400MHz, double the clock rate.

The only way to be sure is to look at the CPU OPN, (Ordering Part
Number), and check it on the manufactuer's site. This will also tell
you the amount of L2 cache on the chip, which also affects performance.

For the Sempron ratings see:

http://www.amd.com/us-en/Processors/ProductInformation/0,,30_118_11599_11604,00.html

I suspect that Sempron's actual bus clock is 166MHz, which means it can
use DDR memory at 333MHz, often called PC2700 DDR. A 3000+ Sempron can
be an actual speed of 1800 or 2000. Confusing, isn't it? :-)
 
I see a PC and it says it's FSB is 1600Mhz, however elsewhere
I think I have seen the same PC and it says it's FSB is 333Mhz
Which is quite a difference.
Can anyone explain this?

Also another example is an AMD 64 3000+ with a FSB of 1600Mhz
and a Semperon 3000+ with a FSB of just 333Mhz (I have those
in a catalogue right in front of me),
Click to expand...

THey are simply wrong. Their specs are not correct and you
will have to know correct specs ignoring what they have
printed.

The typical FSB for Athlon 64 is 200MHz clocked,
double-data-rate (DDR). That's 2 x 200 = DDR400.

For the sempron it would be 2 x 166 = DDR333.
the difference in price of the two
systems is small (about 10%), so what is going on ith such apparently
huge increases in bus speeds. I mean if you can get 4 times the speed
for just a 10% increase in price the slower system would be virtually
unsaleable one would think. I suspect in reality the two systems are
similar in performance. Can anyone shed some light on this?
Click to expand...

Basically the Sempron is a little cheaper, and that alone
'might' account for most of the cost difference. However,
sometimes a system built with a slower CPU, might have
lower-end motherboard or memory, video, etc, too... one
cannot just judge based on the CPU or bus speed (at least,
WE can't, since we don't have the rest of the system specs
but you do). Sempron is set to use a lower bus speed, which
in itself does also cause a little performance loss. For
only 10% difference you're probably better off going with
the Athlon 64 not for the bus speed alone, but also the
larger cache on the Athlon, plus that Sempron most likely
uses a now aging Socket 754 socket which means an older
technology motherboard and less upgradability later (though
there are supposedly some mew socket 939 Semprons on the
market, but odds are against that being one).

The best way to evaluate the two is to consider your most
demanding uses of the system, and seek online benchmarks
towards that application (or as similar an application as
you can find), keeping in mind that other things than a CPU
can be the bottleneck, but when CPUs are being compared then
any competent reviewer will attempt to use some tests that
do show the differences between the CPUs.
 
kony said:
THey are simply wrong. Their specs are not correct and you
will have to know correct specs ignoring what they have
printed.

The typical FSB for Athlon 64 is 200MHz clocked,
double-data-rate (DDR). That's 2 x 200 = DDR400.

For the sempron it would be 2 x 166 = DDR333.


Basically the Sempron is a little cheaper, and that alone
'might' account for most of the cost difference. However,
sometimes a system built with a slower CPU, might have
lower-end motherboard or memory, video, etc, too... one
cannot just judge based on the CPU or bus speed (at least,
WE can't, since we don't have the rest of the system specs
but you do). Sempron is set to use a lower bus speed, which
in itself does also cause a little performance loss. For
only 10% difference you're probably better off going with
the Athlon 64 not for the bus speed alone, but also the
larger cache on the Athlon,
Click to expand...

The cache for the Athlon is quoted as 1MB whichI believe is also wrong
it says 256kb (and 333FSB here)
http://www.comet.co.uk/comet/html/cache/568_275000.html

plus that Sempron most likely
uses a now aging Socket 754 socket which means an older
technology motherboard and less upgradability later (though
there are supposedly some mew socket 939 Semprons on the
market, but odds are against that being one).
Click to expand...

The Athlone is also a 754 anyway I believe.

The 754 V 939 was also an issue for me regarding upgradeability.
however I believe the 939 is already superseeded by 940 and various
other sockets (some 1000+). so the 'extra value' of a 939 is somewhat
dubious as it will be as much of a dodo as the 754 when it come to
upgrade ability.

From recent thread "Question to the Experts about procesors"
"For desktop and uniprocessor workstations AMD supposedly readies the
so-called Socket M2, which will have 940-pins, but will not be
compatible with existing Socket 940 infrastructure. DigiTimes web-site
claims that the Socket M2 will be used for AMD Sempron, AMD Athlon 64,
AMD Athlon 64 FX and AMD Opteron 100-series processors and will
substitute existing Socket 754, Socket 939 and Socket 940 desktop and
workstation infrastructure. For AMD Opteron processors for 2P and MP
servers AMD reportedly prepares a 1207-pin Socket F that will be
utilized instead of Socket 940."


What really annoys me is that I am put off buying a new system because
I cannot be sure of what I am actually buying due to misleading
advertising, I guess the manufactures and retailers make so much money
they don't care whether people buy their products or not.
 
VWWall said:
I think you're confusing FSB bus speed with CPU speed.


There are several AMD64 3000+ CPU's, none of which have a "FSB" of over
200MHz. The actual CPU speed is 2000MHz, derived from a bus clock at
200MHz. The one I have, ADA3000AEP4AX, can use PC3200 DDR memory, which
runs at an equivalent speed of 400MHz, double the clock rate.

The only way to be sure is to look at the CPU OPN, (Ordering Part
Number), and check it on the manufactuer's site. This will also tell
you the amount of L2 cache on the chip, which also affects performance.

For the Sempron ratings see:

http://www.amd.com/us-en/Processors/ProductInformation/0,,30_118_11599_11604,00.html

I suspect that Sempron's actual bus clock is 166MHz, which means it can
use DDR memory at 333MHz, often called PC2700 DDR. A 3000+ Sempron can
be an actual speed of 1800 or 2000. Confusing, isn't it? :-)
Click to expand...


Yes.
This is the spec online.
http://www.comet.co.uk/comet/html/cache/568_270016.html
Note it says FSB 333Mhx and 256 L2 cache.
However in the shop catalogue (which I have right in from of me) it says
FSB 1600 and 1MB L2 cache.
Which you will agree is a significant difference!!

The manufactures site (no info given!!)
http://h10010.www1.hp.com/wwpc/uk/en/ho/WF06b/35123-35527-39847-39847-39847-12189332-55603631.html


Here is an online site which quotes a mere 1 Ghz FSB !!
(slightly different model)
http://www.currys.co.uk/martprd/sto...sku=767039&category_oid=-20730&fm=2&sm=5&tm=0

No surprise that they are "Temporarily Out of Stock" then!!!

So it is rather confusing when you cannot trust the retailers to provide
accurate
information.
Fraudulant is probably a more accurate word than confusing.

I find it really annoying that I cannot find accurate information and hence
I won't buy, not that that bothers the retailers.
 
I believe the Sempron has a cut down of all the instruction set contained in
the AMD64.
So although the speed may look the same the sempron only has a 32bit
architecture as opposed to the 64bit of the AMD64.
Mike
 
*snip*

if you're worried about upgradibility and you want technical questions
answered
then dont but from comet for petes sake ! theyre just an electrical retailer
and
dont even specialize in PCs! another problem with those prebuilt systems is
they
often use micro ATX motherboards with few slots onboard graphics n sound.
the onboard graphics uses up 64 of the 512 mb RAM. that machine is okay for
word processing and internet but useless for gaming. at that price the
monitor
will be cheap too with a low response time - you'll get ghosting when you
scroll
a webpage and any fast moving image (gaming again) will look horrible.

what do you want the PC for exactly and whats your budget? we can then point
you
in the direction of something more suitable.
 
Theres no problem with Comet/Currey's its just that they get their specs
wrong.
Dont plan on buying a pc from them if you might want to upgrade later.
Branded PC's eg HP, Dell etc can be difficult to upgrade
Buy a copy of eg PC Pro and look
 
MrGrumpy said:
Theres no problem with Comet/Currey's its just that they get their specs
wrong.
Dont plan on buying a pc from them if you might want to upgrade later.
Branded PC's eg HP, Dell etc can be difficult to upgrade
Buy a copy of eg PC Pro and look
Click to expand...

I prefer to buy from a shop than say mail order, less hassle
andprobably cheaper.
Regarding upgrading I don't see the problem, no different
from any other computer, you can upgrade drive and memory
but anything more will require a new motherboard and processor,
so you may as well buy a new system. Obviously you get what
you pay for and I assume the big stores have more purchasing
power to get lower prices.
I am not really a power user game player anyway, and considering
my existing sysem is almost adaquate I won't need to upgrade for
a while.
 
Albert Grennock said:
I see a PC and it says it's FSB is 1600Mhz, however elsewhere
I think I have seen the same PC and it says it's FSB is 333Mhz
Which is quite a difference.
Can anyone explain this?

Also another example is an AMD 64 3000+ with a FSB of 1600Mhz
and a Semperon 3000+ with a FSB of just 333Mhz (I have those
in a catalogue right in front of me), the difference in price of the two
systems is small (about 10%), so what is going on ith such apparently
huge increases in bus speeds. I mean if you can get 4 times the speed
for just a 10% increase in price the slower system would be virtually
unsaleable one would think. I suspect in reality the two systems are
similar in performance. Can anyone shed some light on this?
Click to expand...


Look here is a Semperon with a 1600Mhz FBS

http://www.comet.co.uk/comet/html/cache/568_274917.html

However in my catalogue from the shop it says 333Mhz FSB.

I guess all the prices are wrong too.
 
Albert Grennock said:
I see a PC and it says it's FSB is 1600Mhz, however elsewhere
I think I have seen the same PC and it says it's FSB is 333Mhz
Which is quite a difference.
Can anyone explain this?

Also another example is an AMD 64 3000+ with a FSB of 1600Mhz
and a Semperon 3000+ with a FSB of just 333Mhz (I have those
in a catalogue right in front of me), the difference in price of the two
systems is small (about 10%), so what is going on ith such apparently
huge increases in bus speeds. I mean if you can get 4 times the speed
for just a 10% increase in price the slower system would be virtually
unsaleable one would think. I suspect in reality the two systems are
similar in performance. Can anyone shed some light on this?
Click to expand...

According to this both figures for FSB are wrong as the only
options are 600,800 and 1000

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Front_side_bus
 
Albert Grennock said:
I prefer to buy from a shop than say mail order, less hassle
andprobably cheaper.
Regarding upgrading I don't see the problem, no different
from any other computer, you can upgrade drive and memory
but anything more will require a new motherboard and processor,
so you may as well buy a new system. Obviously you get what
you pay for and I assume the big stores have more purchasing
power to get lower prices.
I am not really a power user game player anyway, and considering
my existing sysem is almost adaquate I won't need to upgrade for
a while.
Click to expand...

given what you say theres no point worrying about socket 754 v 939 etc...
both those machines will have a Sempron running on 333FSB with 256kb cache.
not great for newer games but just fine for Office Apps, Internet browsing
and older games.
512mb RAM is fine - you only need 1gb for games etc ... and that onboard
graphics chip and monitor
wont be designed for games anyway.
 
*snip*

if you're worried about upgradibility and you want technical
questions
answered
then dont but from comet for petes sake ! theyre just an
electrical retailer
and
dont even specialize in PCs! another problem with those
prebuilt systems is
they
often use micro ATX motherboards with few slots onboard
graphics n sound.
the onboard graphics uses up 64 of the 512 mb RAM. that
machine is okay for
word processing and internet but useless for gaming. at that
price the
monitor
will be cheap too with a low response time - you'll get
ghosting when you
scroll
a webpage and any fast moving image (gaming again) will look
horrible.

what do you want the PC for exactly and whats your budget? we
can then point
you
in the direction of something more suitable.
Click to expand...

Im gettin an amd 64 3500 and the fsb on that is 2000mhz so is the 3000
so there arnt worng.
 
Back
Top