Intel FSB Settings

S

Shmuckety

[H]ard|Gawd
Joined
May 19, 2005
Messages
1,919
I am no expert in this matter, so I will ask those of you that are. Why doesn't Intel switch over to FSB 1600 and switch to a 800mhz DDR standard? Would this increase processor performance or not?

I know that Intel has shyed away from pure speed and toward as many cores as possible on one chip, but would this increase performance significantly or not, is my question?

 
Can we buy DDR 1 rated at 800 and what kind of timings are we talking about. I believe this would also require a bus speed of 400 thats a bit fast for the times don't you think?
 
Thats what I am wondering. No not DDR1, DDR2. Would it make a difference to have a lower multiplier? Instead of 200 x 19 =3.8ghz it would be 400 x 10 = 4.0 ghz. Would the increased bus help?

 
Shmuckety said:
Thats what I am wondering. No not DDR1, DDR2. Would it make a difference to have a lower multiplier? Instead of 200 x 19 =3.8ghz it would be 400 x 10 = 4.0 ghz. Would the increased bus help?

Click to expand...

I believe that you'd have limited performance gains with that setup. FSB isn't as big of a limitation with 1066+. Where you would see the biggest increase with overclocking increasing the bus speed on 800fsb chips, but with 1066 and 1333 becoming the standard I don't think it's a big deal. I do understand what you are saying.... you are suggesting that 1600FSB would allow the memory and the FSB to "sync" up like you'd get on the older 865/875 chipsets. While that was a great benifit then, the "snyc" up isn't that big of a deal anymore.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top