CPU speed question 8 replies

Please wait...

RadioactiveLobster Forum Admin

Jeff is a mean boss

565,402 XP

28th July 2002

0 Uploads

53,121 Posts

1,330 Threads

#1 13 years ago

Ok, im dumb.....well thats out of the way..

I was looking around and i saw a AMD Athlon XP 2700 advertised at 2100ghz

well my AMD Athlon XP 2800 is only at 2084ghz.... isnt it suppose to be faster??? is my processor running slow?? i have noticed that i get low CPU scores in the benchmarks that i run....and at what temp should i get worried for my CPU?


If there is no image, Mikey broke something...



Eagle One

:-D

50 XP

22nd December 2003

0 Uploads

2,992 Posts

0 Threads

#2 13 years ago

yours isnt running slower, its just the 2700+ is running faster my 3500+ is supposed to run at 2.2Ghz which it does. So an XP 2700+ at 2100Mhz is faster than what it will be supposed to be at




FN_lewrbm69

It's Not Easy Being Green

50 XP

10th November 2003

0 Uploads

3,372 Posts

0 Threads

#3 13 years ago

wow it might be the configuration u are running that is slowing your prosscur down, what dard ware u got shuved in there?




C38368

...burning angel wings to dust

50 XP

14th February 2004

0 Uploads

5,013 Posts

0 Threads

#4 13 years ago

The AXP 2800+ (Barton) is supposed to run at 2.083GHz. That's a 12.5 multi on a 166MHz clock (333MHz effective FSB). It's got 512k L2 cache and it built on the 130nm process. The AXP 2700+ (Thoroughbred) also sports a 333MHz effective FSB, and is clocked at 2.167GHz (13x133MHz). However, it only has 256k L2 cache, and AMD believed that the lack of the extra cache made this somewhat lesser of a performer than the 2800+ Barton, despite it's higher clock speed. Welcome to the wonderful world of AMD ratings.




FN_lewrbm69

It's Not Easy Being Green

50 XP

10th November 2003

0 Uploads

3,372 Posts

0 Threads

#5 13 years ago

i hate AMD but they were first in 64bit prosscurs yh. that 12.5 is odd most are maltapuls of 18 now. i am going to look in the diff. my intel 2.4 i have it running at 3.1




ChronoJedi

T3h Chrono. Fear me.

50 XP

13th February 2005

0 Uploads

94 Posts

0 Threads

#6 13 years ago

Well, AMD has been reliable in providing well structured 64-bit processors, but Intel has closed the gap with their own brand of 64-bits. Still in BenchMark tests AMD Athlon FX processors are better than Intel's. But in terms of your question S.T.A.L.K.E.R., if you really wanted to get your CPU speed up to advertised speed, just go into BIOS at startup and overclock your processor speed.




C38368

...burning angel wings to dust

50 XP

14th February 2004

0 Uploads

5,013 Posts

0 Threads

#7 13 years ago

2.4GHz/800MHz FSB Intel CPUs have a 12x multi. @ChronoJedi~ His CPU is at it's proper speed. The 2800+ is an arbitrary "performance" rating that bears only partial relation to actual clock speed.




RadioactiveLobster Forum Admin

Jeff is a mean boss

565,402 XP

28th July 2002

0 Uploads

53,121 Posts

1,330 Threads

#8 13 years ago

aight , thanks for the info....


If there is no image, Mikey broke something...



Nordicvs VIP Member

A Man among humans

50 XP

4th May 2005

0 Uploads

2,865 Posts

0 Threads

#9 13 years ago

I had the same thing two or so years ago...bought an AMD 2100+ but it turned out to be only 1.5Ghz. The explanation I got consisted of...Pentiums use a different benchmarking process for its chips, so that is (or was) sort of the standard; AMD claims its benchmarks are right, Intel says that its benchmarks are right. That was a while ago, so maybe they're the same now.