X2 3200+

[{LSK} Otacon]

Umm actually your wrong yet again. The reason i went from 2.9gb/s to 4.2 was becuz of my processor. My old P4 had about a max bandwidth of 3.2gb/s, but it would only go to that if i OCed it to 3.5ghz. Your harddrive has NOTHING to do with your ram bandwidth. Nothing. And yes, your hard drive does effect the speed at which windows loads, but so does your ram. As you just said, it loads it into your ram. Do you try to be stupid or does it come natural? Switching from PATA to SATA have nothing to do with your memory bandwidth. 2 completely different things. I can run my PATA by its self and still get 4.2gb/s. The only difference its the data rate of the info coming from the hdd, to the ram. Which my PATA was 34mb/s and my SATA is 62mb/s. Which actually my SATA seems to be running slow.

 

[Iluvpenguins]

has anyone wondered if maybe the program was being a jerk?

Right click on my computer and go to properties,it should list the type of cpu you have there aswell

 

[Filip]

The only way to find out is by removing the IHS

http://forums.extremeoverclocking.com/showpost.php?p=1841180&postcount=1

 

[Ku-sama]

oh.... my.... god.... you.... are... f*cking.... RETARDED!!!!
my Athlon 64 FX-62 showed up as just an AMD processor with everything as question marks... because my CPU-Z was outdated.... and in fact, i have a E6 AM2 64 3200+ Orleans sitting right next to me.... hold on a sec.... *Fetches hobby knife and removes its IHS* uhm, yeah, let me see... i think theres only one little rectangle here.... let me see.... yeah, defiantly more than 0 and less than 2... so yeah SINGLE CORE ATHLON 64 IS EQUAL TO ONE CORE NO MATTER WHAT!!! AMD, to reduce processor cost, stopped producing higher cache in mid end X2 processors.... why might you ask? to cut down on prices.... it would cost MUCH less for AMD to throw away a non working processor in a batch of 1000 (1:1000 DOA ratio is estimated) then to make millions of dual core processors and have that 1:1000 chance so they enable the extra core.... hell, they don't test the processors, they just replace them when they are sent back........ please don't ever say something as misleading as that again.... honestly....

 

[{LSK} Otacon]

pwned.

 

[Bobo]

if youd like i can explain lol...

Please do? Or at least try...because you won't succeed. How long will it take you to notice that your logic is totally flawed crap?

take it out of your signature please.

I think I'll put it in my sig too.

 

[{LSK} Otacon]

lol. Even bobo backed me up. pwned squared man.

 

[Burgerbob]

Wow, just decided to read the thread... PWNED, the CPU-Z prob is just old or wrong... wowz.

 

[fade2green514]

yea, i definitely typed that wrong earlier. i edited it to correct you correctly. lol ram bandwidth doesnt effect how quickly windows loads. at all.

Comparing my 4.2gb/s to my old 2.9gb/s its way faster, windows only takes 15-20 seconds to load, where as 2.9gb/s it would take almost a minute if not longer. And if you ask me 4.2gb/s is very good considering its PC3200, rated at 3.2gb/s.

my pc3200 use to score 5.4gbps. that was Corsair XMS.
dual channel allows it to surpass 3200MB/s theoretical maximum bandwidth.
my newer Corsair XMS runs at DDR520 and scores around 7gbps.
PWNED
and also, quit calling me stupid... cause im not stupid.

 

[{LSK} Otacon]

PWNED? Not really dude. Im sorry if i mislead anyone, but i when i last tested my bandwidth, my HT speed was set to 1x. I just now tested it with 5x and wow, over 6gb/s. But still, you have a better cpu then me, its no surprise you have a higher bandwidth.



I will now test it at 220mhz.

 

[fade2green514]

umm actually ive got my hypertransport on a lower multiplier, under 1ghz, so yours would actually get a higher bandwidth than mine... my memory is just better... not to mention a core 2 duo would score WAY below ANY AMD proc just because of hypertransport alone... running on intels "fsb" at 1066mhz when hypertransport has two bus lanes ultimately giving 2ghz worth of performance...
cpu speed has nothing to do with memory speed or the fsb of the processor.

 

[fade2green514]

PWNED? Not really dude. Im sorry if i mislead anyone, but i when i last tested my bandwidth, my HT speed was set to 1x. I just now tested it with 5x and wow, over 6gb/s. But still, you have a better cpu then me, its no surprise you have a higher bandwidth.



I will now test it at 220mhz.

so i was right... it was because of the fsb and not the cpu speed...
plus, my memory is running at 260mhz, which is ridiculous for most ddr memory (of the density, at least)
don't crash your computer, i need someone to argue with. haha

btw, you keep mentioning my proc is better than yours... haha funny, cause i would called that PWNED
then of course theres the fact that i have 2gb of memory... not 1gb...
oh and the 7900gtx with 512mb of memory... lol
and my logitech G5 laser mouse haha...
PWNED
hell i have 1671mb free memory, how much do you have free? lol

 

[{LSK} Otacon]

Ok, now your starting to make no sense once again. But anyway, 220mhz lowers my bandwidth oddly enough. I even lowered the HT multi to 4x like i was supposed to, dropped me down to 5gb/s. And how were you right about my fsb? Believe me, im not gonna crash my computer, im smarter then most. And 260mhz isnt THAT impressive for DDR ram, they have 1 gig sticks that run 300mhz at 2-2-2-2. I choose not to push my RAM that far becuz i spent good money on it and im not gonna see just how fast it goes, considering it goes plenty fast enough right now. I really dont care how much free memory i have. There is no PWNED dude. Your the one who got PWNED like 20 times in one thread. I find that pretty funny.

And for future referrence, your FSB basically is your CPU speed. Your FSB directly effects your CPU speed. No, they arnt the same thing, but the faster the FSB the better, your CPU speed can be 3ghz, but with a 133mhz FSB (or whatever) it will still be slow as hell.

As a matter of fact i have one stick of Gamer OC ram that i really dont care whether it dies or not, maybe ill pop it in and see how fast it goes. Its rated at DDR500, 512meg stick. Lets have fun shall we.

Well, my FSB wont go above 250mhz without locking up, so i cant really push my DDR500 past that. But heres a screen anyway:


Not the best OC DDR400 ram, but its fun to play with, be more fun if i had a cpu with a 266mhz fsb.

 

[fade2green514]

But anyway, 220mhz lowers my bandwidth oddly enough. I even lowered the HT multi to 4x like i was supposed to, dropped me down to 5gb/s. And how were you right about my fsb?

wow. you lowered fsb(hypertransport) to 4x and wonder how memory bandwidth went down.

Believe me, im not gonna crash my computer, im smarter then most.

you dont have to be stupid to crash your computer, you just have to overclock it too far. generally crash != ruin though.
geil actually created ddr600 with a cas latency of like 1.5 i believe. speeds like that aren't really usable though... for system memory haha. it would do good for a 7900gtx... actually my 7900gtx has much faster memory than that. 1.6ghz 1.78ghz overclocked... 1.1ns

And for future referrence, your FSB basically is your CPU speed. Your FSB directly effects your CPU speed.

'
hmm wow. i thought cpu speed was the core speed (not actually the front side bus, though its often referred to as the front side bus) times the cpu multiplier.
either way my memory is definitely better... and "for future refernce" the core speed (what you refer to as fsb) is what the motherboard bases the cpu speed off of, and what it bases the memory speed off of. some motherboards support memory dividers, some don't...
funny how my timings are lower than yours... and my frequency is higher... oh and my bandwidth is like twice yours.
PWNED

 

[Archangel]

geil actually created ddr600 with a cas latency of like 1.5 i believe. speeds like that aren't really usable though... for system memory haha.

Well.. i have my Bus speed at 300MHz atm.. so if i had that RAM, i wouldnt need to put it on a divider.

funny how my timings are lower than yours... and my frequency is higher... oh and my bandwidth is like twice yours.

PWNED

could you cut that please? its really getting annoying. if you can Overclock higher than someone else with the same hardware.. doesnt mean you did something better than someone else. then you just got lucky your hardware accepts those settings. I'm sorry to say.. but you cant actually PWN someone, or however you want to call it. if you want to overclock,. and you do actually overclock it, you did a good job already

 

[fade2green514]

could you cut that please? its really getting annoying. if you can Overclock higher than someone else with the same hardware.. doesnt mean you did something better than someone else. then you just got lucky your hardware accepts those settings. I'm sorry to say.. but you cant actually PWN someone, or however you want to call it. if you want to overclock,. and you do actually overclock it, you did a good job already

buying the right parts that'll let you overclock a ton, is part of overclocking. i bought Corsair XMS... and a reputable model of the stuff.
if you read oc101 it says... you need a good power supply that'll power an overclock, you need good memory that'll let you overclock, and a good motherboard that'll let you do things such as overvolting, and memory dividers... i bought all the right stuff.
oh, you also have to get the a good cooler, and then apply it correctly. thats why i sanded the ihs and bottom of the heatsink down to a mirrored finish, and added a couple of case fans to my computer... so i could overclock much further.
overclocking is a skill, whether you think so or not... i didn't lower temps 5-15C by clicking a few buttons in the bios. lol

doesnt mean you did something better than someone else.

to correct you, it does mean that i did something better than someone else..
at least in this case lol...
lol btw i have a screenshot of my memory bandwidth but photobucket is being slow and im too lazy to try another site... lol

 

[Archangel]

buying the right parts that'll let you overclock a ton, is part of overclocking. i bought Corsair XMS... and a reputable model of the stuff.
if you read oc101 it says... you need a good power supply that'll power an overclock, you need good memory that'll let you overclock, and a good motherboard that'll let you do things such as overvolting, and memory dividers... i bought all the right stuff.

well.. i have some rather cheap RAM, yet i have my system overclocked to 300MHz bus speed.. so there is also a bit luck involved.
about all motherboards have memory dividers ( premade systems excpuded)
and for a PSU.. you need one wich is strong enough..but thats kinda obvious.

you have to be lucky on the core of the CPU.. meaning if it 'likes' to be overclocked, because the same model CPU can go unstable after 200MHz overclock,.. or after 1400MHz.. thats pretty random.
anyhow... in overclocking there is no 'skill' required.. jsut read some guides.. be a bit carefull with the hardware, and voilla.

dont get me wrong.. im not saying you didnt do a nice job.. but by the sound of your posts, it looks like you just look down on the performance of Otacon's system.. and those PWNED reactions are really getting on my nerves.

 

[pbdr]

PWNED....

Is that an acronym or did someone make a type and the a$$h@le switchboard propogate the error?

Appearently, I'm much too outdated for this thread.....

 

[fade2green514]

actually... if you cool your rig well enough on air, you can overvolt it a lot more. i overvolted my proc 200mV and its still running cool... in fact, i dont even need the performance so i normally leave it on default volts. i must say though, i did get unlucky with the processor. mine really didn't like overclocking compared to many others.
though, with some skill in applying the heatsink and cooling it like a professional i did keep it nice and cool even with an overvolt.

well.. i have some rather cheap RAM, yet i have my system overclocked to 300MHz bus speed..

the point of buying good ram would be to overclock that part of the computer too. thats why im bragging about it. lol
i mean, i dont use all of my 2.6ghz... i just like to have it there to brag about. haha

it looks like you just look down on the performance of Otacon's system..

its not even that, he just gets on my nerves with all his zealous reactions to things i say. i mean i admit sometimes i can be wrong but who cares?
he just started butting heads with me thats all (about the memory and all), i wasn't going to let him win.
funny since memory bandwidth barely effects system performance anyways... lol
wait til i get my core 2 duo... then we'll have a processor benchmark haha, ill get like twice the performance... lol

lol btw some of the processors WERE created with a disabled core... not all of them, but some of them were haha.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_o..._1_core_disabled.2Fnot_functional.2C_90_nm.29
if wikipedia isn't reliable enough for you, then i don't know what is lol

 

[{LSK} Otacon]

omg. Dude. There isnt words to describe a person like you........seriously. Have you even re-read the thread to see the things youv said? Hardly any of it makes sense at all. And that site isnt really reliable, since pretty much any random person can input that information in there. But even with that, there isnt anything on that site that proves your point. And you have never yet said that you were wrong.

And to correct you once again, i INCREASED my fsb, not lowered, your HT freq and your FSB are different. And my HT speed was 1.8ghz, which isnt that much lower then its stock, and the reason i lowered it was becuz the HT does not overclock well, so when overclocking any AMD with HT you have to lower the HT multi.

I really think this thread should be closed, if an admin would please. Its become nothing more then a competetion and an argument.