AMD Processors
Decrease font size
Increase font size
Topic Title: Which processor to get?
Topic Summary:
Created On: 08/08/2004 12:59 PM
Status: Read Only
Linear : Threading : Single : Branch
1 2 Next Last unread
Search Topic Search Topic
Topic Tools Topic Tools
View similar topics View similar topics
View topic in raw text format. Print this topic.
 08/08/2004 12:59 PM
User is offline View Users Profile Print this message

Author Icon
SimonB
Junior Member

Posts: 5
Joined: 08/08/2004

Hi there,

I BADLY need a new procesor but can't get anything that works. I have a msi-6389 motherboard that comes from a Gateway system. The specs for the board are here' ">http://support.gateway.com/sup...oard/8507869/07869.htm.

I successfully tried an Athlon 1000 but failed with an Athlon 1600+. Every spec I look at seems to tell me that CPU from 1100 to 1600 have 200 or 266 FSB which the board doesn't support.

Can anyone tell me which CPU I can buy and do CPU exist with different FSB's?
I found some Athlon 1200 and 1300 for cheap. A Duron will also be ok for me but harder to find.

Thanks in advance,

Simon B.
 08/08/2004 03:18 PM
User is offline View Users Profile Print this message

Author Icon
Charlie22911
Voodoo Programmer

Posts: 3278
Joined: 04/09/2004

QUOTE AMD® Athlon™ processors at 1000 MHz, 1100 MHz, 1133 MHz, 1200 MHz, 1300 MHz, 1333 MHz, and 1400 MHz 
  Ultra ATA 33/66/100 drives 
  100/133 MHz Front Side Bus (FSB)


i dont know much about these cpu's but any one wit a max of 133Mhz fsb ought to work. a bios upgrade might be in order as well if you plan to do this.

-------------------------
Desktop:
Phenom II x6 1055T @ 4GHz | 4x2GB Patriot DDR3 1600 @ 2000 | 3x AMD Radeon HD6970 Crossfire

Laptop:
Core i7 2960xm @ 4.2Ghz | 4x4GB Kingston DDR3 1866 | 2x GTX 580m SLI OC 725/1450/1500
 08/08/2004 11:57 PM
User is offline View Users Profile Print this message

Author Icon
Wildcard
Senior Member

Posts: 929
Joined: 02/14/2004

Hi folks

I think you're trying to run an Athlon XP CPU on a board that won't recognise it. Voltage wise you're OK. You can run an Athlon Thunderbird "B" (100MHz) or "C" (133MHz) CPU, upto 1400MHz.

http://www20.tomshardware.com/...ard/...history_big.gif' ">http://www20.tomshardware.com/...es/cpu_history_big.gif

Some boards that offered the KM133A where able to accept XP processors (e.g Biostar), but even these chips had to be of a certain "core" - not just any XP processor. I have no idea whether or not you could chance it with an "Applebred" Duron - maybe someone here more knowlegeable knows if it can be done?

Can I just ask, are you using the onboard ProSavage graphics or a seperate 4x AGP card? That onboard chipset is bad - very bad, for demanding 3D games.



Maybe a Geforce 4 Ti 4200 would help if games are your flavour? It would certainly wipe the floor with a 1300MHz Athlon or Duron (Morgan core only) using the onboard video. That's of course assuming you're into games.

Via KM133 board specs:
http://www.viatech.com/en/ProS...Chip...psets/km133.jsp' ">http://www.viatech.com/en/ProS...e%20Chipsets/km133.jsp
http://users.rcn.com/chare/chipsets.htm' ">http://users.rcn.com/chare/chipsets.htm


Via KM133 based board Benchmarks:
http://www.anandtech.com/printarticle.html?i=1385' ">http://www.anandtech.com/printarticle.html?i=1385

p.s. I beleive your board comes from a Gateway Select 1200 computer, if that's any further use.

Hope this helps.

-------------------------
. AMD CPU Data: http://www.tomshardware.com/20.../amd...ult/page23.html & http://www.amdboard.com/amdid.html
. Belarc Advisor: http://www.belarc.com/free_download.html
. GPU Comparison for Laptops: <a href="http://www.notebookche
 08/11/2004 07:01 PM
User is offline View Users Profile Print this message

Author Icon
SimonB
Junior Member

Posts: 5
Joined: 08/08/2004

Thank you very much for the info.

As for the video chipset being not so good, I don't really care since I don't play any games. I really just need a basic setup.

Thanks for the help, I'll let you know how it turns out.

Simon B.
 08/11/2004 07:40 PM
User is offline View Users Profile Print this message

Author Icon
Charlie22911
Voodoo Programmer

Posts: 3278
Joined: 04/09/2004

in that case if you are using onboard video i advise you get a cheap 4Mb pic card (or agp if you wish) because onboard video kills mem speeds slowing your computer down in ANYTHING you do...

-------------------------
Desktop:
Phenom II x6 1055T @ 4GHz | 4x2GB Patriot DDR3 1600 @ 2000 | 3x AMD Radeon HD6970 Crossfire

Laptop:
Core i7 2960xm @ 4.2Ghz | 4x4GB Kingston DDR3 1866 | 2x GTX 580m SLI OC 725/1450/1500
 08/11/2004 07:49 PM
User is offline View Users Profile Print this message

Author Icon
MD - Moderator
Deployer of Mjölnir - House Keeping

Posts: 11102
Joined: 11/05/2003

QUOTE (SimonB @ Aug 8 2004, 08:59 AM) Hi there,

I BADLY need a new procesor but can't get anything that works. I have a msi-6389 motherboard that comes from a Gateway system. The specs for the board are here' ">http://support.gateway.com/sup...oard/8507869/07869.htm.

I successfully tried an Athlon 1000 but failed with an Athlon 1600+. Every spec I look at seems to tell me that CPU from 1100 to 1600 have 200 or 266 FSB which the board doesn't support.

Can anyone tell me which CPU I can buy and do CPU exist with different FSB's?
I found some Athlon 1200 and 1300 for cheap. A Duron will also be ok for me but harder to find.

Thanks in advance,

Simon B.
The link you gave says that the board has the VIA® KM133 chipset.

IIRC that chipset is only good for a 200MHz bus (2x100) part, ie the Athlon 1.4, A1400AMS3B, which runs at 14x100Mhz...was the maximum cpu you could use.

You may be stuck with the 200MHz bus athlon 1.4...The proprietary computer companies want you to buy a new machine not upgrade an existing one...Sorry.

Later

MD

-------------------------
The opinions expressed above do not represent those of Advanced Micro Devices or any of their affiliates.

Physics? Ha! This is clearly magic and devilry at work. Prepare firewood! We have witches to burn!


MODERATOR
 08/12/2004 12:25 AM
User is offline View Users Profile Print this message

Author Icon
Wildcard
Senior Member

Posts: 929
Joined: 02/14/2004

Shouldn't jumper J1 give the game away (the FSB setting)?

Although..getting at these things is easier said than done..

-------------------------
. AMD CPU Data: http://www.tomshardware.com/20.../amd...ult/page23.html & http://www.amdboard.com/amdid.html
. Belarc Advisor: http://www.belarc.com/free_download.html
. GPU Comparison for Laptops: <a href="http://www.notebookche
 08/12/2004 12:58 AM
User is offline View Users Profile Print this message

Author Icon
-Milt-
Senior Member

Posts: 1722
Joined: 03/15/2004

Simon,

The Athlon 1600+ is actually one of the Athlon XP series, and the 1600+ that you tried is a 'Palomino'.
So anything newer (or faster) than an Athlon 1400 is NOT going to work in your motherboard.

You can get an Athlon 1333 MHz for $42 from Newegg, which is an excellent company to deal with, here...
http://www.newegg.com/app/view...esc....-103-156&depa=1' ">http://www.newegg.com/app/view...tion=19-103-156&depa=1

You can also find others by going to http://www.pricewatch.com/h/mn.aspx?i=3&f=1' ">http://www.pricewatch.com/h/mn.aspx?i=3&f=1
There is an Athlon 1.4 (or 1400 MHz) there for $61 but I really don't think it's worth 50% more money to get only 5% more performance

-------------------------
Here is my new PCChips M848A' ">http://img.photobucket.com/alb...2_T-2-3-3-6-2_M848.jpg v2.1, with a 1700+ @ 2411 MHz, and my trusty old PCChips M810L' ">http://members.lycos.co.uk/mmm...00MHz_Sandra_tests.jpg v7.1A, with a Barton 2500+ @ over 3500+. Some of my fancy cars are on this pag
 08/18/2004 10:43 PM
User is offline View Users Profile Print this message

Author Icon
SimonB
Junior Member

Posts: 5
Joined: 08/08/2004

OK,

So, if I understood correctly an Athlon Thunderbird 1.33 or 1.4 GHz will work even if the FSB is said to be at 200 or 266? That's the part that screw me up... If so then I have a couplke options...

Thanks,

Simon B.
 08/18/2004 11:03 PM
User is offline View Users Profile Print this message

Author Icon
-Milt-
Senior Member

Posts: 1722
Joined: 03/15/2004

Simon,

Yes, any Athlon Thunderbird 1.33 or 1.4 GHz will work.
I think that what is confusing you is the 'double-pump' rating that gets used by the marketing boys.
I know that it's confusing, and it certainly was to me at first, but here's something about it that I wrote some time ago.
Basically, that 200 or 266 actually means a 100 or 133 MHz FSB.

Here goes... any questions. I'm here.

I don't know of any website with a simple, easy-to-understand explanation, so I'll give it a quick-and-cheap-and-dirty stab, here & now...

Just in case you are not familiar with this new DDR thing, this little chart compares the new 'PC' rating system, to the 'DDR' rating, to the actual 'Maximum MHz' that the memory is 'rated' to run at....
But the same 133 MHz = 266 DDR appies to CPUs and mobos as well.

PC# vs. = DDR# vs. = MHz

PC1600 = DDR200 = 100Mhz
PC2100 = DDR266 = 133Mhz
PC2700 = DDR333 = 166Mhz
PC3200 = DDR400 = 200Mhz
PC3500 = DDR433 = 216Mhz
PC3600 = DDR450 = 225Mhz
PC3700 = DDR466 = 233Mhz
PC4000 = DDR500 = 250Mhz
PC4200 = DDR533 = 266Mhz
PC4400 = DDR550 = 275Mhz
PC4500 = DDR566 = 283Mhz
PC??00 = DDR600 = 300Mhz


Note that the 'DDR rating' is always exactly double the 'actual speed in MHz' that it was designed to run at.
DDR (or Double Data Rate) memory is also SDRAM memory, but it is able to read info or 'data' on BOTH the rising and falling edge of a pulse...
Hence the name... 'Double Data Rate' (or DDR for short)...
SDRAM can only read it on one edge of the pulse.
But, DDR266 is still only running at an actual 133 MHz

The same thing applies to processors, and mobos, that are rated as 166/333 (or, to use the Marketing boys description, as a '333 CPU'... a '333' processor is running at 166 MHz.
Period.
Only on the newest mobos will you find a setting in your CMOS Setup that allows you to set it as high as '333'... and that would really be 666 DDR if it was possible
and that's because it ACTUALLY RUNS AT 166 MHz

-------------------------
Here is my new PCChips M848A' ">http://img.photobucket.com/alb...2_T-2-3-3-6-2_M848.jpg v2.1, with a 1700+ @ 2411 MHz, and my trusty old PCChips M810L' ">http://members.lycos.co.uk/mmm...00MHz_Sandra_tests.jpg v7.1A, with a Barton 2500+ @ over 3500+. Some of my fancy cars are on this pag
 08/18/2004 11:13 PM
User is offline View Users Profile Print this message

Author Icon
SimonB
Junior Member

Posts: 5
Joined: 08/08/2004

Thanks, that clears a lot of things out.

For the records my memory is PC133 SDRAM that should work by your explanation.

Let me see if I'm right: DDR 266 memory actualy runs at 133 (like my PC133) but reads(or write) twice at each clock count. So the CPU actually runs at 133 but can get twice the information from the memory at each clock count with DDR than SDRAM. Is that it or I got something wrong?

Thanks,

Simon B.
 08/19/2004 12:11 AM
User is offline View Users Profile Print this message

Author Icon
-Milt-
Senior Member

Posts: 1722
Joined: 03/15/2004

Simon,

You've got it absolutely correct.

In theory, with DDR, it should be twice as fast as using your PC133.
In reality, you usually gain about 5 to 10% in actual system performance.

This might be a good time to ask you to please, do me a favor, and put everything that you currently know about your system's specifications into your 'Signature' by hitting 'My Controls' (at the top of every page), then 'Edit Signature', then enter your details in the box that appears.

Include the Model and REV number of your mobo, OS used (Win??), BIOS used (?????.rom ?), Athlon 1000 @ (7.5x 133 = 1000, or 10.0x 100 = 1000?) @ ??°C idle/ ??°C load, memory used [i.e. 2 x 256 PC133 ], vid card, and PSU specs... +3.3v=??A, +5.0v=??A & +12v=??A (from the sticker on the side of your PSU), if you have them.

There is no way in he11 that you are expected to know all of that junk, but please, put in the stuff that you do know about, and a ??? for the stuff you don't, and I'll show you where to find it, Okay?

You only need to do this once, and then every time you post here, those specifications will appear automatically at the bottom of each and every one of your posts.

Knowing all the nitty-gritty details about the system we are working with can be EXTREMELY important when working on one of these mobos.

Then I don't have to depend on this aging gray matter to remember, or search for, or possibly even make some WaG (wild-assed guesstimate) about what your system specs might be, each and every time I reply.
I hate having to search back through the entire thread just because I'm not bright enough to remember what CPU, or memory type, you were running... you follow me?

-------------------------
Here is my new PCChips M848A' ">http://img.photobucket.com/alb...2_T-2-3-3-6-2_M848.jpg v2.1, with a 1700+ @ 2411 MHz, and my trusty old PCChips M810L' ">http://members.lycos.co.uk/mmm...00MHz_Sandra_tests.jpg v7.1A, with a Barton 2500+ @ over 3500+. Some of my fancy cars are on this pag
 08/19/2004 06:56 AM
User is offline View Users Profile Print this message

Author Icon
Charlie22911
Voodoo Programmer

Posts: 3278
Joined: 04/09/2004

but like i said, onboard graphics im most if not all cases will slow you down not to mention they just stink, later on i would invest in a cheap 4Mb+ gfx card if games are not your thing, if so then any good gfx card will give a better preformance boost then a cpu will in most cases...

-------------------------
Desktop:
Phenom II x6 1055T @ 4GHz | 4x2GB Patriot DDR3 1600 @ 2000 | 3x AMD Radeon HD6970 Crossfire

Laptop:
Core i7 2960xm @ 4.2Ghz | 4x4GB Kingston DDR3 1866 | 2x GTX 580m SLI OC 725/1450/1500
 08/19/2004 07:55 AM
User is offline View Users Profile Print this message

Author Icon
eddaweaver
Senior Member

Posts: 1390
Joined: 03/10/2004

I'll try to explain. Using "onboard" video graphics uses up the computer's memory bandwidth. This slows down the computer somewhat.
If you're not playing games, it'd be good of you to pick up a very cheap second hand Matrox Millennium G200 card, as they've got excellent visual quality. The onboard "Savage" graphics has extremely poor visual quality, blurry text, bad colour spectrum, etc.
 08/19/2004 07:56 PM
User is offline View Users Profile Print this message

Author Icon
Charlie22911
Voodoo Programmer

Posts: 3278
Joined: 04/09/2004

also probably bad for people who are photosensitive (people who have seizures when exposed to certain patterns or flashing lights)...

-------------------------
Desktop:
Phenom II x6 1055T @ 4GHz | 4x2GB Patriot DDR3 1600 @ 2000 | 3x AMD Radeon HD6970 Crossfire

Laptop:
Core i7 2960xm @ 4.2Ghz | 4x4GB Kingston DDR3 1866 | 2x GTX 580m SLI OC 725/1450/1500
 08/20/2004 02:17 AM
User is offline View Users Profile Print this message

Author Icon
Rico
Voodoo Programmer

Posts: 3439
Joined: 04/19/2004

you could get a new decent system for under 500$

athlon xp 2600+
512 kingston pc3200 DDR
geforce mx440
asus mobo (it might be ax7n or something with X's and stuff)


-------------------------
AMD X2 4200+ *** DFI NF4 Ultra-D (modded to SLi-D) *** eVGA 7950GT (with Zalman FC-ZV9)
January 16th was the day life changed... the day I bought WoW
 08/20/2004 02:54 AM
User is offline View Users Profile Print this message

Author Icon
eddaweaver
Senior Member

Posts: 1390
Joined: 03/10/2004

QUOTE (Charlie22911 @ Aug 19 2004, 03:56 PM) also probably bad for people who are photosensitive (people who have seizures when exposed to certain patterns or flashing lights)...
are you talking about the Savage's visual quality? yes it is pretty bad
 08/21/2004 12:53 PM
User is offline View Users Profile Print this message

Author Icon
Charlie22911
Voodoo Programmer

Posts: 3278
Joined: 04/09/2004

yes, it is bad, so is the visual quality that of a 512K isa card i have...

-------------------------
Desktop:
Phenom II x6 1055T @ 4GHz | 4x2GB Patriot DDR3 1600 @ 2000 | 3x AMD Radeon HD6970 Crossfire

Laptop:
Core i7 2960xm @ 4.2Ghz | 4x4GB Kingston DDR3 1866 | 2x GTX 580m SLI OC 725/1450/1500
 08/21/2004 02:17 PM
User is offline View Users Profile Print this message

Author Icon
eddaweaver
Senior Member

Posts: 1390
Joined: 03/10/2004

It's a travesty that all through the 1990s people had attrocious visual quality on their CRTs because video card makers skimmed a few dollars off the production processes required to produce a quality analogue signal. Matrox cards were so much better that they can make a bad old monitor look better than a brand new one.

Still, my old Vesa local bus 1mb card was pretty good, and it was a cheapy S3 card.
 08/21/2004 05:16 PM
User is offline View Users Profile Print this message

Author Icon
SimonB
Junior Member

Posts: 5
Joined: 08/08/2004

OK,

So I bought an Athlon Thunderbird 1.33 GHz. Everything works just great. Thanks to everyone for your input.

As for the onboard video, it's ok for me. I will possibly look for a cheap AGP card anyway, just to speed things a bit.

BTW, does anyone know how to access the BIOS on that Gateway motherboard? I tried DEL, F1, ESC, etc. at startup with no success.

Thanks

Simon B.
Statistics
112018 users are registered to the AMD Processors forum.
There are currently 0 users logged in.

FuseTalk Hosting Executive Plan v3.2 - © 1999-2014 FuseTalk Inc. All rights reserved.



Contact AMD Terms and Conditions ©2007 Advanced Micro Devices, Inc. Privacy Trademark information