Affects of Intels 800FSB to the AMD's 333

What type of performance increase can Intel expect with the increase of the FSB over AMD chips running 333 or 400 OC. If i've learned something higher FSB's means a better performing chip with all that bandwith involved will the AMD get crushed? Or will it be able to compete with the Barton core?

The year does not look good for AMD, but then they've already stated they're not interested in the "speed wars" any longer.

So what your saying is they are backing of like a bunch of p***ies. And, waiting for the Hammer to save them in another 8 months.

ok heres my thinking on the intel 800mhz buss.
first its only 200fsb speeds x4.amd is 166 btw,or the high end chips are.
even at 4x133 or 533 buss the cpu cannot utilize the bandwith it has,let alone a 200fsb.
intel should concentrate on making the cpu push more work per cycle not up the fsb.
this will only help in the benchmarks for intel,mainly 3dmark2003.and we all know in amd land, benchmarks are useless anymore to tell cpu performance,but it does make benchmarks higher.

this will make amd even more undesirable with joe shmoe.benchmarks are what the somewhat informed joe use.others,like amd people have learned to use them for what they are.


on a side issue have you ever noticed how intel users can usually knock out the high fsb speeds on thier memory?like 250fsbx4 making killer bandwith scores?my opinion is they arent even pushing hardly half the info the stick can handle and doesnt stress the memory,thus letting it run higher.

that statement may be way off base and is just my opinion but i thought something nice about intel should be said

amd will survive i promise you that.things look 200% better these days than they did 6 months ago and i honestly was looking for bancruptcy papers to hit the lawyers and web anytime.

the A64 is delayed and i do say MS is 50% of the blame.this has been a known issue for 5 months since ive been following this.the other 50% is the soi stuff.we dont want another NVIDiA rollout do we?

Ok I read that the Athlon 64 will have 800FSb but will on be working on a single channel. This would be limiting the CPU since its able to handle higher FSB. Will this means since the Nforce 64 or whatever Nvidia calls and others happen to be only single channel. The FSB will for the most part go to waste. Unless a manufacture implements a system simalar to Intels which combines the Bandwith. That was also NF2's idea but its doesn't work cuz theres only 266 and 333fsb and I haven't seen people underclock there ram to see if it actaully works, or use two PC1600 modules and run it sync at 400 fsb thus the whole money savings process intel happens to promotes actually then applies to an AMD system, if it works.

ludio ive not seen 800fsb on A64 but ive read 400fsb or to put it into amd terms 2x200fsb.
most people dont here dont run 133 or 166 fsb most try for 200fsb.
the extra bandwith you are refering to is coused by the 4xbus the intels chip offers.amd would be more suited to use it over intel imo.they do more work per cycle and are limited by bandwith.the other way around is true for intel.

this isnt nvidia's fault but amd's.and trust me amd has no memory bandwith ever going to waste.they could double it and it might be right even with what it could use.

and rambus has larger bandwith but it wont take high fsb.

Im just saying, im a little pieved at all the delays that im contemplating just building myself an Intel P4 rig. Then wait till the Athlon 64 matures and get that as replacement. Or I may since I already have the 2400+ get a AMD board and build around that. But im just dissatisfied overall and may just get the Intel now, and sell my 2400+. But I know nothing about the P4 so im starting much from scratch in research.

Ludio said:

Im just saying, im a little pieved at all the delays that im contemplating just building myself an Intel P4 rig. Then wait till the Athlon 64 matures and get that as replacement. Or I may since I already have the 2400+ get a AMD board and build around that. But im just dissatisfied overall and may just get the Intel now, and sell my 2400+. But I know nothing about the P4 so im starting much from scratch in research.

Click to expand...

i can understand you frustration.i could make a million suggestions to amd to make things better but would they listen?
i highly advise building on the 2400 system you have,rather than switching to intel.ill tell you why.

ever hear of someone switching to intel rig and saying "wow what a differance"? no and you wont.the comments ive read are that they notice a large noticable differance in applications running slower.only in benchmarks will you see anything reminding you of intel having speed.

if you take a great mobo liek a NF2 or a kt333 put it at 200fsb and add C2 memory in synch it will outperform its counterparts easily.sometimes in benchmarks also.

the A64 has a long road ahead of it.mainly to just get it up to current speeds and performance.it will be a long battle and who knows amd might have to scrap the whole project if something dont happen.

these delays arent as bad as 6 months ago.heck amd had one good ocing chip the agoia1600 and that was it.the 2200A sucked and tbreds were a joke.and higher speeds were promised for several months long before they ever seen a shelf.i was even more frustrated than you are now.

i just went over to intel land during the slow down and learned what i could there to keep me busy.and as you see i didnt buy into intel either.

You make valid arguements about the switch and im goin to think it over a bit more. Thx Deathstar.

hey np man ive been there and i slam intel alot but some is factual some is just in fun.

but its almost anymore comparing apples to grapenutz.