• Welcome to Overclockers Forums! Join us to reply in threads, receive reduced ads, and to customize your site experience!

Barton 2500 question

Overclockers is supported by our readers. When you click a link to make a purchase, we may earn a commission. Learn More.

Boat

New Member
Joined
Nov 16, 2003
Location
Florida
I've never overclocked anything (yet) and I just put together a system with a Barton 2500 (stepping AQXEA 0331SPMW) and an Asus A7N8X Deluxe. In looking over the bios settings the CPU seems to be running at 100mhz with a multiplier of 11. From the specs I see that default speed should be 166 mhz with an 11 multiplier. Why would this CPU be running so slow and what can I do to get it running at specs?
 
Thats just the safe mode it is booting up in - just change your FSB in the bios to 166 and start from there - to do this may require you changing the cpu frequency setting (or whatever its called in your bios) from auto to manual. BTW welcome to the forums
 
Thanks guys, I changed it to 166 and now I see it is running at 1800 as advertised.

By the way, I'm new to AMD chips so can someone tell me why a Barton that runs at 1800 is called a "2500+". Is an AMD 1800 somehow equivelant to an Intel 2.5 gig chip?

Thanks again.....

Boat
 
By the way, I'm new to AMD chips so can someone tell me why a Barton that runs at 1800 is called a "2500+". Is an AMD 1800 somehow equivelant to an Intel 2.5 gig chip
Yes, AMD switched over to a " performance rating" some time ago. So far they have estimated the performance correctly & indeed a 1.8ghz AMD will run w/ or slightly ahead of a P4 2.5 depending on the application. Basically the AMD does more work per clock cycle.
 
The PR speed rating is intended to be a comparison to a CPU using the Thunderbird (Athlon) core.

I.e. a Barton at 1.83GHz would be as fast as a theoretical Thunderbird CPU at 2.5GHz (which dont exist).
 
David said:
The PR speed rating is intended to be a comparison to a CPU using the Thunderbird (Athlon) core.

I.e. a Barton at 1.83GHz would be as fast as a theoretical Thunderbird CPU at 2.5GHz (which dont exist).

That's the official explanation indeed, but I don't think anyone's fooled by that. :)
 
Back