AMD 2700+ setup correctly?

[lordsmurf]

I've got a KT600-A ECS (Elite Group) board, and an AMD 2700+ CPU.
In the BIOS I've got it set to run CPU clock of 166. Should I go 166 or 167?

I don't care to overclock, just wanting optimal normal settings.

[psx_pirate]

The correct setting would be 166 .... but it will really make very little difference if you set it to 167 .... this is assuming that the fsb of the cpu is 333 ... check and make sure that it is a 333 fsb and not a 400 fsb ... (in which case the setting would be 200)

[lordsmurf]

FSB333
2166Mhz CPU (2700+)

RAM set to 133 also

[lordsmurf]

Actually, does it matter if speeds sync?

My understanding is CPU @ 166 x 2 = 333
and then RAM @ 133 x3 = 333

Do these need to match?
My RAM is max rated 133 and 142 (two separate sticks)
The CPU can be dropped to 133, but I'm guessing that will lower speed of the CPU, underclocking?

I hate AMD and VIA. Complex bunch of BS. Mistake to buy it, should have gotten the Intel/Intel combo.

Thanks for any help.

[redwudz]

You can raise the FSB up a little if you want. But unless the MB separates the AGP settings, your video card may not function properly if you go too far. VIA chipsets are limited for OCing. You don't have to match the FSB and the RAM speed, but if you go to far, your RAM may be unstable, unless you adjust the voltage on them. A lot of this is from the limitations of the VIA chipset. The Nvidia chipsets MBs are a lot easier to work with. You can adjust the AGP timings separately and if you wanted to OC, they have better capabilities.

The older socket A MBs and VIA chipsets are not a good representation of AMD CPU capability. Even the Socket 754 64bit Semprons with a Nvidia Nforce 3 chipsets will perform much better.

[lordsmurf]

My video card is a PCI ATI AIW 7200 card. I really don't know if AGP settings does anything for a non-AGP card. How does this change things, if any?

Oh, I'm pretty sure my RAM is DDR too, so I guess it's really operating at 266?

When this was brand new hardware, I asked around on whether it was worth savings $50 to get this instead of Intel/Intel and all I heard was "oh yeah, great, super, bang for buck, fast, best yet, blah blah blah". I've seen that with AMD for years now, a bit irritated by it, that's all.

I appreciate the help.

It's been so long since I needed to build a system, I forgot a lot of the details needed to nitpick BIOS and other hardware settings.

[wulf109]

I have an XP2700+ in a Biostar M/B. I had run it in an Abit board also. It's very slow running DVD Shrink but seems to run fast with Nero Recode or DVD2ONE. I'm using PC133 ram.
Many newer CPU's run at 200mhz bus speed,but most people will be running PC133 ram.

[Seeker47]

I hate AMD and VIA. Complex bunch of BS. Mistake to buy it, should have gotten the Intel/Intel combo.

What about their (Intel's) move to implement DRM in their current line ? (Or is that only with certain cpu models and not others ?) Should they be rewarded for that intrusive capitulation, even if you happen to have the skills or knowledge to work around it ?

Because of this, and just on principle, I think I'm going AMD next time out. From what I've heard, they've been smoking Intel for a good while now, anyway.

[lordsmurf]

I'm not scared by Intel boogeymen. Last time it was signing P3 with tracking data or some such non-sense that was entirely overblown by online computer dorks and got carried into the media by reporters that didn't do much fact checking.

And we already know that whatever Intel does, others will follow. It's been that way since the beginning. Even old Apple is no exception (honestly, they never were either).

What Intel CPUs have on their side is a solid line of high quality motherboards both from themselves and from third-party makers. That's just not the case with AMD, lots of crappy ones out there, most of them actually. And I don't think it's from AMD's lack of trying either, it's just how things are. Intel's "weakness" is lack of ability to tweak hardware (for some of us, that's actually a good thing, hard to screw it up that way).

With an Intel system, I can just install hardware or software and be on my merry way to using it. With AMD systems, I find things rarely work right away, you've got to tinker and dick around with things, always some conflict somewhere. Video is also one of my main computer activities, and Intel excels at it while AMD often just hobbles along (depends on the exact video task).

I really don't care what other people buy. Good luck to you either way.

[gshelley61]

I've been running a home built AMD XP2400+ system on an older Elite M/B. It has mostly run very well for me, although it is a bit slow by today's standards. It has been a reliable setup.

[budz]

I used to buy only INTEL PROCESSORS but got curious of what AMD had to offer. I started with a AMD socket 462 and eventually made my way to a AMD 64 SEMPRON socket 754 & AMD 64 VENICE socket 939. I have to say I won't be buying anymore INTEL PROCESSORS because the AMD 64 processors are a lot cheaper and can easily be overclocked using the right mobo and ram without having any HIGH HEAT TEMPERATURES. I built a AMD 64 PALERMO 2800 SEMPRON socket 754 pc and was so impressed that the processor could be overclocked to 2.20ghz with STOCK AMD HSF. I just built a AMD 64 939 VENICE 3200 pc with the same results cool temps with overclocking to 2.40ghz.

The INTEL processors from the PRESHOTTS to present all have HIGH HEAT TEMPS where you eventually and almost always have to use a 3rd party heatsink fan. Which cost $$$$!!!!! I'm now installing a Zalman heatsink in my P4 3.00ghz Northwood processor pc because the temps get HIGH during intense VIDEO ENCODING.

[redwudz]

AFAIK, the AGP speed is just for a AGP card, so you should be able to ignore that. You could run CPU-Z http://www.cpuid.com/cpuz.php to check the speeds everything is running at. The memory frequency should be the same as the FSB frequency. I admit, the FSB and other settings on the AMD BIOS can be confusing with the terminology and the different multipliers.

If the CPU model, the memory and the motherboard are capable of it, you can run at 200MHz FSB.

Socket A CPUs and MBs are getting a little old to be building a new system with. If you had it to do over, I would look at a AMD Sempron 754 CPU and MB setup if you want to explore AMD processors. They are a little outmoded also, but still have very economical pricing and decent performance for entry level systems. You can get a 2800+ for around $70US and a MB for about the same.

[lordsmurf]

Oh it's not new, I've had this for a long time now. It's just that I had some issues with hardware and software, and needed to fix some of them. If I bought something new today, I'd be grabbing a non-Prescott Intel of some sort.

[Jester700]

I don't get those who say "always" or "never" WRT CPUs. The 2 biggies leapfrog each other so often that it only makes sense to make up your mind when needed and not before. At this moment, an Intel dual core looks most likely for me, but in 3 months when I actually BUILD the thing, how much will the 3800+ AMD dual have dropped?

[lordsmurf]

how much will the 3800+ AMD dual have dropped?

For some of us, price is not the leading concern. A factor yes, the major one no.