Darkness2k Posted June 26, 2002 Share Posted June 26, 2002 I got an AMD Athlon XP 1800+ (1.53) a while ago. I contacted AMD at that time cause I did not see that much of an improvement from an Athlon Thunderbid 1.4Ghz. They sent me back an FAQ that states that to use the additional features of an XP processor, you must reinstall your operating system. Yesterday (26/06/2002) I finally had the chance to do just that. I can now say, I am running..... exactly the same as I was before (slightly quicker due to wiping out all the guff that builds up on the harddrive!) Is there any way I can check if this fast-cache, Quantispeed or additional-3D-commands are in use?!? Thanks for your help. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sentinal Posted June 26, 2002 Share Posted June 26, 2002 Try this program. It's called WCPUID v3.0g It gives u various info on your CPU and chipset info of your video card, mainboard, etc... http://www.h-oda.com/ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Riker Posted June 26, 2002 Share Posted June 26, 2002 I did not see that much of an improvement from an Athlon Thunderbid 1.4Ghz. ITS ONLY 130 mhz more What do you expect 5X more performance, you will find very little difference, between the two. Ive got a P4 1.6 if i oc it to 2.133 i dont notice a difference in anything, other than benchmark programs such as 3dmark2001SE etc. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Crazy_Seb Posted June 26, 2002 Share Posted June 26, 2002 I upgraded from a TBird 1100 to a XP 1800+, no difference, except i got bragging rights, which rock. :p Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Darkness2k Posted June 26, 2002 Author Share Posted June 26, 2002 Yes but the things is... people are getting 8000-9000 3DMarks... while i'm only getting 7400 the 1800 is meant to run at the equivalent of 1.8Ghz because of their special technology... but I dont see bugger all difference! if it was only 130 mhz faster it would have been called a AMD Athlon Thunderbird 1530 wouldnt it! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Roger H. Veteran Posted June 26, 2002 Veteran Share Posted June 26, 2002 well it's a new Core so it's not the same as the T-birds. They added SSE instructions to it as well as some other stuff and more to make it run cooler or whatever they did. I went from a 1.2 T-bird to a 1800+ and i did notice a lil difference. The problem is that the processor is more than fast to handle all applications and all that now, the problem is the PCI bus and the HDs and CDroms and all that connected to it. Which video card do you have? I have an 1800+ and a GF3 TI 200 and i only get 7000 3Dmarks. I didn't OC my CPU or my GPU so the people with 8000 - 9000 prolly did or have a normal GF3 (or Ti 500) or a GF4 for that matter Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Amadeke Posted June 26, 2002 Share Posted June 26, 2002 Does your BIOS regonize it as an XP 1800 ? If not then you need a BIOS upgrade first. If it does, are all speeds set correct in the BIOS ? Also for the RAM, which should be DDRam 2100 at least. If it is still SDRam then find the lack of performance there. There is more to a computer then just the CPU. Lucky for Intel there are still a lot of people who think different. If the problem still persists, please specify more hardware info. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
altezza Veteran Posted June 26, 2002 Veteran Share Posted June 26, 2002 It was a very big increase in speed when I upgraded from Pentium II 450mhz to AMD Athlon XP 1700+ Also, DDR memory also contributes to much higher speed of my PC :D Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CustardFD Posted June 26, 2002 Share Posted June 26, 2002 Originally posted by altezza Also, DDR memory also contributes to much higher speed of my PC :D I didn't think you got a choice with the AthlonXP Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Darkness2k Posted June 26, 2002 Author Share Posted June 26, 2002 I'm sure you can all read the tag below this message: PC2100 DDR memory Geforec 3 Ti 500 I'm not expecting it to be really fast just cause of CPU, I do know about computers believe it or not I just want a real reason why I dont seem to have benefited from AMD's recent propaganda. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Amadeke Posted June 26, 2002 Share Posted June 26, 2002 And your BIOS settings are set correct too ? Just asking cause at first my XP1500 would not run at 266 in the beginning until I made some changes to the memery settings. To CustardFD: to choice of Ram depends on your MB, not your CPU Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
krshna Posted June 26, 2002 Share Posted June 26, 2002 It was a problem to put my 2 athlo?n mp running at 1800+ during 15 days it was running at 1150 mhz, until i just go o the agent and "force him" to check the fan. It was not placed where it should be, and i think now is not very well. After we put the jumpers to fsb 266 and we were surpsised, was working at 266 mhz. The problem is the cpu0 temperature, is higher than 50? and some times hangs.... mobo Tyan thunder k7 bios phoenix server 2 athlons mp 1800+ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Steven Posted June 27, 2002 Share Posted June 27, 2002 Originally posted by Darkness2k I got an AMD Athlon XP 1800+ (1.53) a while ago. I contacted AMD at that time cause I did not see that much of an improvement from an Athlon Thunderbid 1.4Ghz. They sent me back an FAQ that states that to use the additional features of an XP processor, you must reinstall your operating system. Yesterday (26/06/2002) I finally had the chance to do just that. I can now say, I am running..... exactly the same as I was before (slightly quicker due to wiping out all the guff that builds up on the harddrive!) Is there any way I can check if this fast-cache, Quantispeed or additional-3D-commands are in use?!? Thanks for your help. why would ANYONE notice spped increase in 133Mhz? DOH :D Previous 1.4GHz Current 1.53GHz Differance - 133MHz Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Darkness2k Posted June 27, 2002 Author Share Posted June 27, 2002 Can't you read previous posts? According to AMD the 1800 should outperform that of an Intel 1.8.... thats 400mhz faster than the 1.4 Their technology in the chip "quantispeed" and enhance 3DNOW! etc is meant to make it that much faster But I'm only getting 7400 3dmarks while everyone else is getting between 8000 and 9000 with the same CPU and gfx card (and usually half the memory!). As far as I can tell, the CPU is set correctly in the bios. It is detected as AMD Athlon XP 1800+, the same as it is detected in Windows. Isnt it just the CPU that has the FSB of 266? Cause the rest of the mobo runs at 133 or something like that (the mobo can be overclocked to 150, but I dont see why I need to overclock just to get scores other people get with no overclocking):right: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sentinal Posted June 27, 2002 Share Posted June 27, 2002 I think you need to re-read what AMD said. They said a AMD Athlon XP 1800+ would out perform an Intel 1.8ghz... which on many benchmarks it does, but it probably doesn't beat it's speed... Performance, CPU Calculations, etc etc are probably better than the intel. The reason you are only getting 7400 3dmarks is because it is a 3D Benchmark, not a CPU benchmark. In order to hit 8000 or 9000 you would need, your same system, but with probably a Geforce 4 Ti 4600, 512mb of DDR333 PC2700 RAM and maybe even a 2000+ AMD... Try the PCMark2001 benchmark by madonion.com, that will give you CPU benchmarking, RAM & Hard Drive. I myself run an AMD Athlon XP 1800+ with a crappy Geforce 4 MX 440, and 256mb RAM, and I'm only hitting around 4000 or so with 3dMark. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Darkness2k Posted June 27, 2002 Author Share Posted June 27, 2002 As I said, comparing my system to that of others with the SAME CPU AND GRAPHICS CARD, I am getting 7400 while they are getting between 8000 and 9000! This is after there was nothing installed on the system as well... just Windows XP, all updates, 29.42-gfx drivers and 3DMark 2001SE Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Amadeke Posted June 27, 2002 Share Posted June 27, 2002 It is indeed not only the CPU that needs to run at 266 also the RAM should. I think (gonna try it myself this evening and get back to you) you can check this with SisSoft Sandra That was also my problem as I said before that the memory settings were not correct, which slowed down the whole system If you install a new CPU some motherboards take the default BIOS settings Could you tell me what MB you have ? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
eugnostos Posted June 27, 2002 Share Posted June 27, 2002 Seems to be all about bragging rights... I have a XP1800+ with the following.. Shuttle AK-31 Rev 2 MB 1 GB Crucial Registered ECC RAM Visiontek GF 3 ( not a Ti model) Running Windows XP Pro. 29.80 Drivers VIA 4.38 4-1's No Over Clocking at all. I average 6966-7005 3D Marks This in no way gives me ANY bragging rights. However, my system is extremely stable. I find that way more important. As for the quantispeed, and the 1800+ being equal to a P4 1.8. This would apply primarily to CPU test. And to that end, I do see a difference in the 1800+ compared to the old T-Bird core. Just my 2 Cents. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
=NickJ= Posted June 27, 2002 Share Posted June 27, 2002 Did you not read what the dude before wrote? The CPU isn't the bottleneck! In windows you will notice f*ck all difference between a T-bird 1400 and an XP 1800+. Why? Because Windows is already running as fast as it possibly can with current technology (PCI bus, hard drive read speeds etc). If you're noticing large delays in performing operations then you need to step back and take a serious look at how its all put together and configured. However, pit an Athlon XP 1800+ against a T-bird 1400 at something like encoding a video file and the XP will leave the t-bird for dust. You wont notice a speed increase until you're maxing out the t-bird, where the XP1800 will still be able to cope. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Darkness2k Posted June 27, 2002 Author Share Posted June 27, 2002 Hmm... Need to find out why mines not giving 8000+ 3dmarks... sure I got 500 more marks than what I had with the 1.4thunderbird.. but thats nowhere near 9000 u see on 3dmark.. what else could be slowing it down... my mobo dont support PC2700 so it will need to stick at PC2100.... As far as I know the only difference between my mobo (GA7DXR) and the upgraded version (GA7DXR+) is a faster RAID (ATA133) which i'm not that fussed about As much as I try to avoid VIA only mobos, that seems to be the only way as AMD chipset mobos dont seem to have the speed-factor... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
eugnostos Posted June 27, 2002 Share Posted June 27, 2002 Yes, I did read the entire thread. Thank you. My post was a compilation of comments for the entire thread. Also, as my last comment stated. in CPU only test, the XP DOES perform better than the older T-bird. That is all. ciao Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
=NickJ= Posted June 27, 2002 Share Posted June 27, 2002 Originally posted by eugnostos Yes, I did read the entire thread. Thank you. My post was a compilation of comments for the entire thread. Also, as my last comment stated. in CPU only test, the XP DOES perform better than the older T-bird. That is all. ciao my reply was to the original poster not you, otherwise i would've quoted you Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
eugnostos Posted June 27, 2002 Share Posted June 27, 2002 Ok. No harm No Foul... ;) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts