# clock speed

## cf25

so my desktop chip is *supposed* to be an amd 1400.  i say it like that because i have to set it in the bios as 1050.  when i set it at 1400 it locks up every 5 minutes.  is there a way i can tell for sure?

now, i got this thing second hand, so i am second guessing it i guess.

----------

## cf25

also, while i'm asking questions...

is there a way to tell which motherboard i have?  i think its from SiS

----------

## pjp

Somewhere on the motherboard will usually have a printed model number.  

Go to SiS' website to see the model numbers so you have an idea of what 

to look for.

----------

## praxim

Funny that you should mention this...

I got an ASUS A7S333 a few months ago.  It crashed constantly during compiles the first day, then just plain froze after ten minutes after that.  This was, of course, if you ran the chip at its intended 1500 MHz- if you ran it at 1150, it crashed less, but was still unbearable.  I call ASUS, and they told me that the board was very particular about what type of RAM it would cooperate with.  They gave me a list of only three manufacturers that I should purchase RAM from.  I went out and bought some Samsung RAM, and I haven't had a problem since.

----------

## cf25

i dont know if it is related.  but promptly after i got the thing, i tried to install windows xp (its for my wife.  chill out.)  but it kept hanging on the install.  i tried every version of windows i could get my hands on, 2k, me, 98.  none would finish.  

i finally figured out that something had gone wrong with my ram.  i went out and bought a new chip and walla!  it installed fine.  

now that you say that though, i wonder if it could have fried my ram because it was running at 1400 then.  if i can ever figure out what kind of mobo i have, i'll have to check that out.

----------

## pjp

If the processor is truly rated for '1400', it shouldn't be an issue.  I have heard some time ago 

that some CPU's were being overclocked and resold as a higher MHz CPU.  Don't most CPU's 

have their rating on them from the MFG?

----------

## fghellar

A side note, just in case...

The AMD Athlon XP processors are identified by numbers, e.g. Athlon XP1800, but these numbers aren't the actual clock speed they run at. The Athlon XP1800 model runs at 1500 MHz.

----------

## arkane

I didn't think you could "fry" your ram by running the processor too high?

I thought the bus speed was the determining factor?

----------

## proxy

if you wanna know stuff bout your cpu (including speed)

```
cat /proc/cpuinfo
```

 :Smile: 

----------

## abhishek

U can get theprocessor fastre by increasoing the bus speed(which i guess can fry the ram) or increasing clock multioplier(only affects cpu)

----------

## abhishek

Also most processors have the clock multipliers locked(intel=unlockable, amd unlockable b something u do to the chip), so most times when the cpu speed is increased its done by bus speed

----------

## arkane

 *data_the_android wrote:*   

> Also most processors have the clock multipliers locked(intel=unlockable, amd unlockable b something u do to the chip), so most times when the cpu speed is increased its done by bus speed

 

Intel's locked the cpu multiplier since the celeron 300a.

Ahhh, the good ol' days  :Smile: 

----------

## Swishy

AMD 's chip's arnt sold by actual MHZ they're sold by a performance rating,so if you've been sold an 1400+ processor , this indicates the cpu will perform comparable to a p3 1400 or similar but the actual clock speed will be lower .....

Cheers

Dale.

----------

## dmcaul

Oddly enough I have that exact same issue on my box.  The chip was bought before AMD released their "+" ratings, so the rating is correct (unless I got a bad one), but the system runs unstably at above 1.1G.  It's also mega-unstable at 133MHz FSB at any speed, so I'm running at 100MHz with 11X multiplier, and blaming the cheapo generic brand RAM for the problem.

I thought for a while it could have been the cooling (my home-built boxes tend to be hit-or-miss in that dept), but even at higher clocks the CPU temperature was remaining under 50deg C, and presumably not melting at that.

----------

## pjp

Just occurred to me... I've never had to tell my BIOS what the MHz of my system were.

----------

## delta407

You haven't used AMD recently, have you?  :Wink: 

----------

## klieber

moving to hardware forum.

--kurt

----------

## jkinross

I had the same problems but with a different motherboard.  It is most likely memory timing.

First update the BIOS for your motherboard.

Then adjust Chipset Driving Control

Disable Super Bypass Mode

Set your memory CAS latence to 2.5

----------

## Jacaranda

I'm guessing it's an athlon.

What sort?

I don't think durons have got that fast yet.

And I thought AthlonXP started at 1500.

Laptop, something makes me think there was a 1400 for laptops, or something...

Of course, I could be completely wrong.  :Wink: 

Either way, I'd guess a 1400 to be around 1.1 - 1.2ghz.

Note to self, NEVER post before coffee again...

----------

## Rys

It's a 1.4GHz Athlon Thunderbird that you're running at 10.5 x 100 rather than 10.5 x 133 that you should be running at (it's a 133MHz CPU).

Sound like either you can't keep it cool enough or there is some component in your system that doesn't like the higher front side bus speed.

Rys

----------

## arglist

I'ved the same problem on my A7S333 board,

but new RAM (Samsung) and

https://forums.gentoo.org/viewtopic.php?t=22232

helps.

----------

## lx

I have a asus a7v333 and a athlon-xp 2000+ (1667Mhz) and it runs very stable 256Mb pc2700 CL2.5 kingston memory (note however that you need to set the DDRAM setting correctly in bios, if you use TURBO as performance option and you have CL 2.5 memory you shouldn't use SPD settings, but override them)....... Never had any problems on any computer with memory, but maybe I'm just lucky.....

Cya lX.

----------

## rbonthond

i have always had AMDs, but my k7-550mhz had a whole bunch of problems with stability. After my first boot i had to do a reset before everything went stable... never figured out why. (ohyeah, acpi is really evil with amd's)

now i have a p4 and it is _really_ stable ! (the only thing is that the bogomips are a bit lower then i expected, always thought that bogomips=2xcpu)

root@hideout bin # cat /proc/cpuinfo

processor       : 0

vendor_id       : GenuineIntel

cpu family      : 15

model           : 2

model name      : Intel(R) Pentium(R) 4 CPU 2.53GHz

stepping        : 4

cpu MHz         : 2545.627

cache size      : 512 KB

fdiv_bug        : no

hlt_bug         : no

f00f_bug        : no

coma_bug        : no

fpu             : yes

fpu_exception   : yes

cpuid level     : 2

wp              : yes

flags           : fpu vme de pse tsc msr pae mce cx8 apic sep mtrr pge mca cmov pat pse36 clflush dts acpi mmx fxsr sse sse2 ss ht tm

bogomips        : 5072.48

----------

## Pigeon

Athlon-tbirds are sold at their actual MHz value.  A tbird-1400 runs at 1400 MHz.  They only do that silly fake-MHz nonsense with XP's and MP's. (thoroughbreds out yet?  I'm not up to date on the news)

I'd put my money on faulty RAM, possibly your MB or video card.  A bios flash probably wouldn't hurt.

----------

## lx

The only problem I had with my athlon-tbird 1200Mhz (133Mhz) was that the voltregulator of the motherboard blew up just after the warranty expired, the system however ran very very very stable (all my systems have) and I used and am still using ACPI but both motherboard had VIA chips. I have a 300+ power supply etc......, unstable system can have many causes, overheating being one of the common ones, bad hardware another and variation in voltage another one,....

Well that silly Mhz thing as you probably know is because you should measure the power of a CPU not only by it's raw klokfrequency but by it's raw power, and well test clearly show that at the time, it was the right thing to do regarding the competion with Intel...

Ps. I settle for a lower klokfrequency and higher performance,

Cya lX.

----------

## MarcQuadra

FYI, certain chipsets are NOT AT ALL stable at 133 FSB. I had an abit KT7A that was just junk if you tried to run it at 133MHz, at 100 it was stable as can be. Check the specs, I suspect you have a VIA KT133a under the hood, it's a notoriously nasty chipset. I'm running a KT266a here and it rocks the house as far as I'm concerned, VIA learns quickly from their mistakes.

----------

## Mpemba Effect

Yes thats true, Theres quite a few things here.

1. If your using an old chipset it may be designed for 100Mhz Bus and not 133Mhz .. and maybe unstable. Not sure about what chipset SIS was at when everyone changed. I know the VIA KT133 will not run much past 110Mhz.

2. You don't say what ram you have but if you have older ram say PC100 Cas3 SDram it may not run at 133Mhz, alot will but not all.

3. Temperture, those old Thunderbird 0.18 micron cores used to get hot, you may be running too hot. Around 60C or less should be fine non overclocked CPUs, however the in socket temperture probe seen on AMD boards are notoriously inaccurate so use it as a guide (the temp they display are normally well below true core tempertures ... unless you have an Asus board which often give ridiculously high readings)

4. It's proberbly not this issue, but nevertheless it's a possiblility. If you have a really old PSU it may be this letting you down. A 300W PSU should be fine but it's not all about the wattage. Fire up your machine and check the BIOS voltage meter, and look for low voltage lines such as 12v or 5v lines being well below these marks.

5. Damaged CPU.

One thing the CPU you have is an 1400Mhz Athlon. Your BIOS has obviously auto detected the 10.5x multiplier on the chip. So at 100 x 10.5 = 1050, since AMD has never released a 1050Mhz Athlon, it's pretty safe to say this athlon is a 266 CPU Bus version and is supposed to be ran at 133 x 10.5 = 1400 (thats provided the previous owner didn't modify the bridges to alter the default multiplier, but I'm sure you'll be able to tell by looking for cosmetic damage to them). Finally the default core voltage for a Tbird is 1.75v so make sure that is  :Wink: 

----------

## lx

My old board which I ran at 133Mhz FSB was a asus a7v133 http://www.asus.com/prog/spec.asp?m=A7V133 which uses the VIA KT133a chip, it ran stable using my athlon thunderbird 1200Mhz (133FSB) PC133 Memory. 

Cya lX.

----------

## Mpemba Effect

Yeah the KT133A was designed to be able to run at a 133Mhz Bus, whilst the KT133 ran at 100 ... not quite sure why they called it a 133   :Laughing: 

----------

## lx

The reason I posted was :

 *MarcQuadra wrote:*   

> ....I suspect you have a VIA KT133a under the hood, it's a notoriously nasty chipset. 

 

And seeing I ran the same chipset for over a year without problems, I just wanted to pay my respects to the chipset  :Wink: , (motherboards voltregulator for CPU fan died, still rest survived. Well I bought new motherboard / processor anyway)

Cya lX.

----------

