Are you sure your fsb is 656mhz. I find that very unlikely.

4:5 is not bad at all. Your ram still runs as fast as your CPU can so it doesnt really matter. That would be like a 1:1. It simply means your ram is faster then your CPU.

 

well im looking at the cpuz right now
it says fsb-164.1mhz or so
and it says bus speed 656mhz i figured that the 656 was after OC and the 164 was b4 oc

 

Quote:

Originally Posted by rabies229 well im looking at the cpuz right now it says fsb-164.1mhz or so and it says bus speed 656mhz i figured that the 656 was after OC and the 164 was b4 oc

no. the 656 is 164*4. intel quad pumps there chips. well untell conroe is out, i think. also doesnt 4:5 mean that the ram does 4 cycles and the chip 5 not the other way around?

 

Quote:

Originally Posted by remy5405 no. the 656 is 164*4. intel quad pumps there chips. well untell conroe is out, i think. also doesnt 4:5 mean that the ram does 4 cycles and the chip 5 not the other way around?

oh i see

what should i do with my ram timings.. in bios they are set to 3-4-4-8 but in cpuz they are 2.5-3-3-8
is the 2.5-3-3-8 their max or something?

 

Well that the same number. The fsb you see is 164 and then it tells you the FSB times 4 which is your 656mhz.

Newer CPUs now "double pump" or even "quad pump" the FSB, this is similar to how DDR memory works. For example, the 333Mhz BUS on a processor take a 166Mhz FSB and "double pumps" it.
166Mhz FSB x 2 = 333Mhz

Similar to that, the 533MHz BUS processors are "quad pumped".
133MHz FSB x 4 = 533MHz

 

Quote:

Originally Posted by grkgus Well that the same number. The fsb you see is 164 and then it tells you the FSB times 4 which is your 656mhz. Newer CPUs now "double pump" or even "quad pump" the FSB, this is similar to how DDR memory works. For example, the 333Mhz BUS on a processor take a 166Mhz FSB and "double pumps" it. 166Mhz FSB x 2 = 333Mhz Similar to that, the 533MHz BUS processors are "quad pumped". 133MHz FSB x 4 = 533MHz

oh i see so is my processor really putting out 656 or is that for show?

 

That's a stock 533 MHz FSB CPU, so 656 MHz is very reasonable with an overclock. On the slower FSB CPUs, running a RAM divider can equate to a significant performance increase. By the way, it's not FSB:RAM ratio; it's CPU frequency:RAM frequency.

From what you've written above, everything looks pretty good to me.

 

you cant really judge a cpus speed based on the fsb. im at 283mhz fsb and its not really faster then my other chip thats at 237 fsb. but since it has ht it does get more folding done in less time. the other chip is a intel d 840 at 38ghz and it will fold two wus faster the a 955 extream at 3.68ghz will fold the same two.

 

283 MHz is not your FSB; it's the external clock speed of your CPU. You would certainly expect a CPU with lots of L2 cache to outperform one with less (my 630 at stock at work can outfold my 3.2E @ 3.9 - 2 MB vs 1 MB L2 overcomes 30% difference in clock speed).

 

Quote:

Originally Posted by Taeric 283 MHz is not your FSB; it's the external clock speed of your CPU. You would certainly expect a CPU with lots of L2 cache to outperform one with less (my 630 at stock at work can outfold my 3.2E @ 3.9 - 2 MB vs 1 MB L2 overcomes 30% difference in clock speed).

Uh, he has a 955 Presler clocked at 13x283 = 3.67GHz which is his external clock speed. His bus speed is indeed 283, because stock is 13x267 = 3.46GHz
Taeric, I don't think L2 cache is the only difference, DDR2 with the higher bandwith probably helps out a lot. I mean, comparing my 920 with 4MB, there isn't a significant preformance difference over a 640.

@ remy5405- Your dual core presler will out fold that other rig with HT, because HT simulates a 2nd imaginary core, when the presler has 2 physical cores.

 

Nope, 3.67 GHz is not the external clock speed; it's the CPU clock speed. External clock speed is more or less the universal frequency used to time most everything in the system. CPU, RAM, AGP (and PCIe in some cases), PCI, etc., etc. are all based on that with various multipliers. For his 955, the stock frequency is 266 MHz with a FSB of 1066 MHz. With a bit of an overclock, the external clock speed got bumped to 283 MHz with a 1132 MHz FSB.

L2 can make a huge difference in some applications, though by no means all. I've run a fair number of comparisons on my work rig and home rig, and it's annoying that the slower Dell at work can outperform my faster rig at home at some things.

 

How can you have an FSB of 1000MHz+ if multiplier x fsb = CPU Speed.

 

Quote:

Originally Posted by MaFi0s0 How can you have an FSB of 1000MHz+ if multiplier x fsb = CPU Speed.

There are two numbers to represent the FSB speed when talking about Intel CPUs: The original frequency and the quad-pumped frequency.

In the formula CPU speed = FSB x multiplier the original frequency is used.

The 1000 MHz you are referring to is the quad-pumped frequency and it's not used in the above formula. To get the original frequency simply divide 1000 MHz by 4 resulting in 250 MHz and use this result to calculate the CPU speed.

 

The quad pumped frequency is the FSB. The "base" frequency is the external clock speed/frequency. I feel like a broken record in this thread.