Overclock.net › Forums › AMD › AMD CPUs › Whats better: higher or lower multi?
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Whats better: higher or lower multi?

post #1 of 6
Thread Starter 
Just wondering what is better to use:

Higher FSB with lower multi, or the opposite?

Right now I'm at 260x11 = 2868... What would be the difference if I had 286x10?
The Rig
(13 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
Q6600 EVGA 780i 8800GT 4GB Crucial Ballistix 
Hard DriveOSMonitorKeyboard
WD Raptor,WD Caviar Windows Vista x64 Samsung 226BW 22" Logitech G15 
PowerCaseMouseMouse Pad
Hiper Type-R 580W CM 690 Logitech MX510 Ron Jon Surfshop 
  hide details  
Reply
The Rig
(13 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
Q6600 EVGA 780i 8800GT 4GB Crucial Ballistix 
Hard DriveOSMonitorKeyboard
WD Raptor,WD Caviar Windows Vista x64 Samsung 226BW 22" Logitech G15 
PowerCaseMouseMouse Pad
Hiper Type-R 580W CM 690 Logitech MX510 Ron Jon Surfshop 
  hide details  
Reply
post #2 of 6
Higher FSB offers more performance (so they say)

But just bench it and see for yourself

But yes in general terms a higher FSB offers more performance.
Smallville
(16 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsGraphics
Intel i5 3570k Asus Sabertooth Z77 Asus HD7950 DirectCU II Asus HD7950 DirectCU II 
RAMHard DriveOptical DriveCooling
8GB DDR3 Corsair Vengeance 1600Mhz 128GB Corsair Force Pro, 2 x 2TB HDD, 500GB Ext... LG Blu-Ray, DVD/CD RW drive Corsair H60 
OSMonitorKeyboardPower
Windows 8.1 Pro 64-bit Genuine 27" Crossover 27Q S-IPS 1440p Cyborg V7 Corsair HX1000 
CaseMouseMouse PadAudio
NZXT Phantom White Microsoft Sidewinder X8 Wireless Steelseries QcK Sennheiser eH250 
  hide details  
Reply
Smallville
(16 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsGraphics
Intel i5 3570k Asus Sabertooth Z77 Asus HD7950 DirectCU II Asus HD7950 DirectCU II 
RAMHard DriveOptical DriveCooling
8GB DDR3 Corsair Vengeance 1600Mhz 128GB Corsair Force Pro, 2 x 2TB HDD, 500GB Ext... LG Blu-Ray, DVD/CD RW drive Corsair H60 
OSMonitorKeyboardPower
Windows 8.1 Pro 64-bit Genuine 27" Crossover 27Q S-IPS 1440p Cyborg V7 Corsair HX1000 
CaseMouseMouse PadAudio
NZXT Phantom White Microsoft Sidewinder X8 Wireless Steelseries QcK Sennheiser eH250 
  hide details  
Reply
post #3 of 6
I keep a 10x multiplier, with lower FSB (243 x10). That is only because my bridge gets really toasty when I push the FSB past 250. It is better to have higher FSB if you can though.
Reincarnate
(13 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
3600+ Brisbane CAALG 0712 @2983MHz DFI LP DK 790GX-M2RS EVGA 7900GS 675/1700 vmod 2x2GB G.Skill PK 1066MHz 
Hard DriveOSPower
WD 1TB Black, WD250GB, WD250GB external Vista Ultimate OCZ 500W Modular 
  hide details  
Reply
Reincarnate
(13 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
3600+ Brisbane CAALG 0712 @2983MHz DFI LP DK 790GX-M2RS EVGA 7900GS 675/1700 vmod 2x2GB G.Skill PK 1066MHz 
Hard DriveOSPower
WD 1TB Black, WD250GB, WD250GB external Vista Ultimate OCZ 500W Modular 
  hide details  
Reply
post #4 of 6
I use higher multi with a lower fsb. Seems to work better with E6600's.
post #5 of 6
I believe the largest gain from AMD systems is in FSB and RAM speeds. Both would be increased if you bump the FSB up, so I would go with the lower multi and the higher FSB. You have a pretty strong cpu @ 2.8ghz...can your RAM hang at 500mhz?
post #6 of 6
I notice zero difference in performance between high htt/low multi and low htt/high multi on AMD setups. At the end of the day you're still capped at a HTT of ~1000 effective and generally performance with HTT's (effective) 650-1100 are near enough the same. There's no reason to even think a High HTT/Low Multi alone would give you a performance increase.

If you have memory capable of high speeds however, that is a different matter. If you've got ram that can hit DDR500-600 with respectable timings (only with respectable timings), you might benefit from low multi's, high HTT's and running memory 1:1 with HTT.

Personally, I run a HTT/multi combo that gets me closest to the memory speed I want. Back when I had an Athlon 64 3700+, I had the option to run 273*11, 300*10 or 334*9 for 3.0GHz. I used 300*10 because I had a 133 memory divider that gave me dead on DDR400, for example.

Mul
    
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
Core 2 Duo E6300 @ 2.80GHz 1.100V DFI LanParty ICFX3200T2R/G RD600 GeForce 8800GT 512mb GDDR3 2GB Patriot Extreme PC2-6400 
Hard DriveOptical DriveOSMonitor
Seagate Barracuda 7200.10 160GB Samsung DVDRW SATA XP Home Dell Ultrasharp 1703FP 
PowerCase
OCZ 500W StealthXstream Antec Sonata II Black 
  hide details  
Reply
    
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
Core 2 Duo E6300 @ 2.80GHz 1.100V DFI LanParty ICFX3200T2R/G RD600 GeForce 8800GT 512mb GDDR3 2GB Patriot Extreme PC2-6400 
Hard DriveOptical DriveOSMonitor
Seagate Barracuda 7200.10 160GB Samsung DVDRW SATA XP Home Dell Ultrasharp 1703FP 
PowerCase
OCZ 500W StealthXstream Antec Sonata II Black 
  hide details  
Reply
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: AMD CPUs
Overclock.net › Forums › AMD › AMD CPUs › Whats better: higher or lower multi?