1066MHZ FSB huh?

G

Glow

Supreme [H]ardness
Joined
Jul 20, 2002
Messages
4,834
Alright I'm not an Intel guy really I have no beef with Intel just usually build AMD systems. I was looking at some intel boards and I saw 1066 fsb then I looked at some P4's 800fsb where or what is the point of the 1066 can you even use it? Can someone explain this to me
 
look at me sig...... :D

while there is no official support from intel's chips (asside from EEs, a pretty stupid decision) you can enjoy a 1066 FSB if you work it right.
 
1066MHz FSB is for the Pentium 4 EE series processors. Currently there are only two that support this FSB speed. The 3.46EE and the 3.74EE.

To answer your other question. Yes you can use it. You just have to have a board capable of dropping the multiplier of the processor to 14x. Then like in the case of my machine, I set it to 267x14 for my FSB and multiplier and then I told the system to run the memory at DDR2 533 and the CPU FSB at 1066. Therefore my new processor clock speed came to 3.73GHz on the 1066FSB.

So yes 800MHz FSB processors can use it. The only boards that support the 1066 bus are i925XE chipset based boards only.

jfb9301 said:
look at me sig...... :D

while there is no official support from intel's chips (asside from EEs, a pretty stupid decision) you can enjoy a 1066 FSB if you work it right.
Click to expand...

Why didn't you go with a higher end video card? You're setup is really sweet otherwise. Or do you not really play games?
 
Glow said:
what is the point of the 1066 can you even use it?
Click to expand...
only with DDR2

i think it's a little ahead of its time right now, like so many other technologies. Give it a year.
 
pigpen said:
only with DDR2

i think it's a little ahead of its time right now, like so many other technologies. Give it a year.
Click to expand...

My northwood 2.4c runs at that bus speed all day long, 267 quad pumped gives me 1068 FSB (though i875p chipset doesn't support it "officially"). Am I missing something? Why is ddr2 required for a 1066 fsb?
 
ncantador said:
My northwood 2.4c runs at that bus speed all day long, 267 quad pumped gives me 1068 FSB (though i875p chipset doesn't support it "officially"). Am I missing something? Why is ddr2 required for a 1066 fsb?
Click to expand...
mem fre. and ratio??
 
Sir-Fragalot said:
Why didn't you go with a higher end video card? You're setup is really sweet otherwise. Or do you not really play games?
Click to expand...


I ran out of money right at the video card..... then the warden bought me the speakers and the power supply... and the video cooler......and the....... heh... I love her.

the x700 (heavily OCed) definitely meets my 1280x960 needs. and in a year or two I can spend the $200 I saved for another card instead of waiting 3-4 years.... I try to buy right at the knee of price/performance.... anything over what I'm running is much more expensive for the returns. The onlything I bought top end was the mainboard and the memory... and this was to ensure I could open up that 1066 and have some leg room to spare..... which I'm using.

Yes I play HL2 and CS:S...it does fine for my needs. MS Flightsim 9 is much more heavily CPU and bandwidth dependant than fill rate.... therefore the 1066 and PCI express decisions.
 
Well, I've been running at 1200FSB for ages on my old IC-7, 2.4C.... so I'm not really impressed with 1066! :p

screen3666.jpg


http://service.futuremark.com/compare?3dm05=63669

http://service.futuremark.com/compare?2k3=3203040

http://service.futuremark.com/compare?2k1=8061769

An old one from back in Nov 2003 with an FX 5900 just to show a date
 
My old 2.4C could run just under a 1200FSB for the short time my water-cooler worked... Then I ran it on a 1GHz bus 24/7 on stock cooling.

(That's an awesome OC on the X700, considering all the problems ATI had with it... How'd you manage to get a Pro past XT speeds?? I figured anything ATI could run as an XT would get sold as an XT with such low yields!)
 
1066mhz fsb is nothing. Apple G5 dual 2.5ghz's run at 1250 mhz fsb per chip stock heh, not to mention comming water-cooled from the factory.
 
1066fsb is NOT correct. 1066 is your "Core Speed" or "Bus Speed" of the CPU
"Front-Side-Bus" is the Mhz of the FSB multiplied by 4 Pipe-Line architectures to give the CPU's "Core Speed".

To acheive 1066Mhz on the core, you need a 266fsb

1066Mhz on the CPU is not the PC's Front side Bus speed.

chrisf6969 says he's been running 1200fsb for some time now. M8y, if you were, your CPU speed would be 4 times that & making it 4800Mhz on the Core/Bus speed of the CPU (which it isnt)

Glow:
Speed in Mhz is just an End product from the Hardware you use. Im sure we would all love to see MUCH faster fsb's than 266 as standard, but then we are still in Pioneering days really. The "need" for speed in computing has always been so. The faster you go, the better the fps. True FSB increases will put your gaming fps where Core speeds cant. In the case of Intels EE based family of CPU's, they give you a choice of multipliers. Sticking these CPU's at their Lowest Multiplier & increasing the fsb as far as it will go will give you your Highest FPS & Benchmark scores. This is of course dependant on the Speed rating of your ram because its the Rams bandwidth that gives the increase.

I run a 240fsb on an Abit IC7Max3, Air cooled. Not a big O/C but its ok for Air & being free. Now if I could only change my multipler to 10, that'd give me 280fsb with the CPU at Stock speed (u do the math) but WOW at the bandwidth on the Memory & OMFG at the 3DMark scores.
 
Kin Hell said:
1066fsb is NOT correct. 1066 is your "Core Speed" or "Bus Speed" of the CPU
"Front-Side-Bus" is the Mhz of the FSB multiplied by 4 Pipe-Line architectures to give the CPU's "Core Speed".

To acheive 1066Mhz on the core, you need a 266fsb

1066Mhz on the CPU is not the PC's Front side Bus speed.
.
Click to expand...

good info. However, everybody here is well aware. It's common for people to refer to the multiplied FSB as FSB just the same. I don't think anybody's going to get confused what a 1066fsb means.
 
And besides, Intel begs to differ.
Intel 925XE chipset specs
1066-MHz Front Side Bus (FSB) enables support for the latest Intel Pentium 4 Processor with HT Technology Extreme Edition at 3.46 GHz and above.
800-MHz FSB enables support for Intel® Pentium® 4 processors supporting HT Technology...
Enhanced performance architecture, with support for 1066-and 800MHz FSB processors and DDR2 memory, optimizes data transfers between the processor and system memory.
Click to expand...
 
ALMOST everyone knows what we're talking about when we say 1066 or 1200 FSB. Just like you multiplied up to 4800 b/c everyone knows Intel's FSB is quad pumped (4x). So you get the effective speed of 4x your actual Mhz speed.

Everyone likes to use the # that sounds bigger.

When comparing it to Intel's older 66Mhz or 100Mhz bus you do get approximately 12x more bandwidth / faster at 1200Mhz.
 
the increase in bus speed does help. just for kicks i did a sandra memory bandwidth for my system with the bus at 1100 or something like that on a 2.4 C. i don't keep my cpu overclocked :D
with ddr333 ram
and it got a higher score than ddr400 at 800mhz so and the divider was at 3/2 so it was running slower than ddr400 but it "performed" faster. not by much but it was still higher or equal too when clocked slower so i think that was pretty neat
 
mewannafastpc said:
the increase in bus speed does help. just for kicks i did a sandra memory bandwidth for my system with the bus at 1100 or something like that on a 2.4 C. i don't keep my cpu overclocked :D
with ddr333 ram
and it got a higher score than ddr400 at 800mhz so and the divider was at 3/2 so it was running slower than ddr400 but it "performed" faster. not by much but it was still higher or equal too when clocked slower so i think that was pretty neat
Click to expand...

You should have been getting a decent improvement in bandwidth... my guess around 5300-5400 depending on timings. (6-10% improvement)

Plus a HUGE improvement from the CPU clock running faster. If you could hit 1100FSB, You SHOULD set your FSB to 250 and ram ratio to 5:4 and run like that. A nice smooth 3Ghz. No REASON not to!!

default 800FSB gives you about 4900mb/s on 875 mobos

at 1200FSB, I was getting about 6000mb/s with the 3:2 ratio (2-3-2-6)

at 1136FSB, with crappier ram I still get about 5400mb/s with 3:2 ratio (2.5-3-3-7)
 
Glow said:
Alright I'm not an Intel guy really I have no beef with Intel just usually build AMD systems. I was looking at some intel boards and I saw 1066 fsb then I looked at some P4's 800fsb where or what is the point of the 1066 can you even use it? Can someone explain this to me
Click to expand...

Damn, we hijacked the crap out of this poor guys thread. What we are saying here is that the 1066fsb support offered by intels "high performance" chipset, and top of the line processors are no real advantage, not even the processor speeds since we are all used to seeing that performance already out of their entry level northwood. So what do you get for the investment in an EE, 925x and ddr2? another 512kb to 1.5mb L2, and more heat to deal with. Intels new processors really came up short in real world performance IMO. Stick with AMD. I'm happy with my P4 system but I didn't pay an arm and a leg for it.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top