PC133 with PC100 setting?

[Shady24]

Hi people. Sorry to beat this PC100 vs. PC133 thing to death but one more if you don't mind.
I have an ASUS K7V MB which supports PC100 and PC133 Ram. I currently have 192 MB of PC100 Ram installed (2 32's and 1 128 stick), and the BIOS is set to PC100 setting.
I just purchased 256 MB PC133 (2 128 sticks). My 3 quick questions are;
Should I max out the three SIMMS available so I have 2 PC133 128MB sticks and 1 PC100 128 stick? Should I just go 256 PC133? And do I need to leave the BIOS setting at PC100 if I mix the two?
Just looking to max/tweak my speed. Games and word programs mostly.

So what would be best? Is the "More Ram the better" the answer?

I emailed ASUS tech support about the BIOS Settings, but figured I get an answer here a lot quicker!

Thanks,
Slim http://www.PCGuide.com/ubb/wink.gif

[Paleo Pete]

I think if you mix them the best way to go would be set it for 100MHz. 256MB of PC133 should perform better than 192MB of PC100, but you're not likely to see a great difference.

I would pull the PC100, set BIOS for PC133 and go with the new memory.

------------------
Soon as I come up with all the answers...they change the questions!!

Computer Information Links (http://www.geocities.com/paleopete/)

[Shady24]

Thanks Pete. I will set the Bios at PC133 and install the new 256 MB Ram then. So 256 Ram with the Bios set at PC133 is better than 384 MB Ram (256 PC133 + 128 PC100) with the Bios set at PC100, if I understand you correctly. Like I said, this is only a PC I use to play game and do word programs. (No big graphic stuff)

Thanks for the quick reply Pete. http://www.PCGuide.com/ubb/wink.gif

[xor_chad]

If you mix then you must choose 100MHz. Else you COULD run into serious errors.

The main question iis this. Does your processor run at 133?
If it can then drop the 100MHz stick and clock your CPU to 133!

256 MB is alot, even today. Unless you use Adobe products often, then i DOUBT you will see the difference between 256 and 384.

Obviously you dont have a 133 MHz CPU but you can try overclocking and that should give you a bigger boost than the additional 128 MB stick would.

Later...

------------------
Chad Wilson
C++/ASM Programmer
PC Support Technician

[Paleo Pete]

Obviously you dont have a 133 MHz CPU but you can try overclocking and that should give you a bigger boost than the additional 128 MB stick would.

chad: I have to disagree on this one, not that overclocking won't work, but on recommending it. I strongly advise against overclocking unless the person KNOWS what they are doing, and is well aware of the risks involved. I also advise against recommending overclocking on the forums, due to the risks, and the strong possibility that the person might not have the computer savvy to do it safely.

If someone asks about it, sure, post some good links that have good info, and point out the risks of overheating, instability, and frying periferals. But I don't think it's a good idea to stick the idea in someone's head especially if they don't know what they're doing. And we rarely know that...

Don't take this personally, or as a put down, you post lots of very good info, I don't want to run you off...Just want you to keep in mind that we normally deal with amateurs who might not know enough to try overclocking...and that's not intended to be a put down concerning the people who ask questions, simply a fact. Fortunately, many of them realize it.


------------------
Soon as I come up with all the answers...they change the questions!!

Computer Information Links (http://www.geocities.com/paleopete/)

[xor_chad]

Hey Pete.
No problem. I completely understand.
I guess i sometimes i take things like overclocking as common place.
I agree completely that its super easy to fry something if you do it wrong.

It took his original post as meaning he was considering either over-clocking with his new 133MHz memory or just add the extra 128MB stick.

Didnt mean to put any evil ideas in his head http://www.PCGuide.com/ubb/smile.gif Hehe. Later...

------------------
Chad Wilson
C++/ASM Programmer
PC Support Technician

[Paleo Pete]

No problem chad, by the way I like the way you responded to the other question concerning overclocking later, very similar to the way I handle it. I added a few good links to check out.

------------------
Soon as I come up with all the answers...they change the questions!!

Computer Information Links (http://www.geocities.com/paleopete/)

[Shady24]

OK guys Thanks, I appreciate the reply. Although I have "tinkered" with overclocking in the past with my PII 400, I don't feel confident enough to mess with my Athlon 700. I figure I only play games mostly so its not really worth the risk.

My MB supports the PC133, so thats what I'm gonna do. 256 MB at PC 133 should play Solitare just fine! LOL

http://www.PCGuide.com/ubb/tongue.gif

[xor_chad]

Hey Shady
You do realize that if you change your memory bus to 133 this will over-clock your CPU right? Instead of 100 x 7 you will be runing at 133 x 7 which is 931 unless you change your multiplier to 133 x 5 which will give you 666...an under-clock!

If you dont change your bus to 133 then there is no reason to leave out the otrher 128MB stick. Laters...

------------------
Chad Wilson
C++/ASM Programmer
PC Support Technician

[Paleo Pete]

chad are you sure about that? I may be wrong (again...) but I thought the system bus and the memory bus were independent of each other...

Anyway, to be on the safe side I would keep it at 100MHz, just to be sure...256MB at 100MHz will still be better than 192MB, and if you stay with 100MHz you can pop in the original one too and have still more...

------------------
Soon as I come up with all the answers...they change the questions!!

Computer Information Links (http://www.geocities.com/paleopete/)

[Shady24]

Maybe I wasn't clear. In my bios, there's a setting for PC100 and PC133 memory. Thats what I'm changing, not the CPU speed.

But I am learning alot reading you two going back and forth! http://www.PCGuide.com/ubb/wink.gif http://www.PCGuide.com/ubb/biggrin.gif

[xor_chad]

Hey Pete and Shady,
While true your CPU has its own Internal Bus Speed, I am almost positive(%9.9) that what is commonly referred to as the system bus is actually the external memory bus. The speed your CPU and Memory exchange at.

If you increase this bus then all else are affected too. So the CPU that normally set itself from the System Bus of 100 now is derived from 133. Laters...

PS
If i am wrong then i sincerely apologize.

------------------
Chad Wilson
C++/ASM Programmer
PC Support Technician

[Paleo Pete]

chad: Like I said, I could be wrong, not really sure about this one, but it seems that the two should be separate, or using 66MHz memory with a 50MHz CPU like the older P-100/150's would overclock the CPU...

Also, when you have separate settings on motherboard or in BIOS, that would seem to be conflicting...which would override the other?

Just seems to be logical, but again, I could be wrong...guess I need to do some digging...

By the way, I deleted your second post, as usual when for some reason it shows up twice...

------------------
Soon as I come up with all the answers...they change the questions!!

Computer Information Links (http://www.geocities.com/paleopete/)

[Shady24]

OK guys, I should receive the Ram today. When I install it and make the changes, I'll let you know what happens.

PS. Can you recommend a ggod place to get a "BanchMark" program? I had one before, but have since Formatted and lost it.

Thanks,
Shady

[scada]

If I remember correctly the "system" bus speed or Front Side Bus is the speed at which the processor communicates with the Northside chip. On most systems this is the same speed as the "memory" channel. There may be a motherboard that will allow you to run the two at seperate speeds.

Please correct me if I'm wrong.

[This message has been edited by scada (edited 11-29-2000).]

[scada]

In fact my system is like that.
I have a Athlon 650 with 512MB of pc133 memory.

The Athlon is running at 200MHz *BUS SPEED between the cpu and the northside or northbridge chip* (100MHz FSB double pumped).
If you try to overclock the processor by increasing the FSB your limted to about 110 MHz. Most people who overclock the Athlon use "Golden fingers" which allow you to change the Multiplier.

So the System bus is 200MHz but the Memory Channel is running at 133MHz .
And of course the PCI bus is running at 33MHz and the AGP bus is running at 66MHz (AGP2x).

To sum up my postion the System bus is only the bus speed between the Northbridge chip and the cpu. The other buses (can) run at different speeds and connect to the northbridge chip which communicates with the cpu at the System bus speed.


Any comments are welcome

http://www.PCGuide.com/ubb/smile.gif



[This message has been edited by scada (edited 11-29-2000).]

[xor_chad]

Scada and Pete
Hey. Yes most new motherboards have this option to
run the system/memory bus at higher than 100 and not actually
effect the clock of other synchronized buses.

The first non-standard clock SDRAM was 124MHz. At this time, motherboards did NOT have this new functionality.
All synchronized buses run synchronized to the memory bus, which is why it is called the system bus.
When the standard was 100MHz clocked memory, the PCI bus was derived from taking 2/3 clock speed. When you changed the clock to 124MHz, you then altered the PCI to 81(ouch, bad idea) this caused MANY problems with add-in cards.

The first fix was to let you choose what multiple of the system bus to run your PCI and AGP bus at...from BIOS. So lots of ppl that just went out and bought 124MHz memory that had not a clue what to do, had problems.

New BIOSs are very tweak friendly and allow you to set every bus setting, but are still derivitives of the memory bus(the speed at which the memory and the CPU interact)

LOTS of other things are affected by changing these settings also that go un-noticed like Cache memory that cannnot keep up with its new bus(CRASH).

I find the most common misunderstanding to be that memory runs at a certain speed. When you buy 66MHz memory you are buying memory that has the capacity of being addressed at UP TO that speed. The memory simply sits and waits for requests. Design issues have made it possible for memory controllers to actually address and process the data faster. Such as the advancements from FPM to EDO. These memory modules were not called 70ns and 60ns memory. But now days the trend seems to be saying you XXXMHz memory, because it can process its requests fast enough for a 100MHz Bus, usually 8ns giving it some leadway for error.
This is why putting 100MHz/8ns memory on a MB with a P-50(like you would ever see this happen) would not cause your pc to overclock - the memory would simply transfer data at much slower rates than it is capable of.

Consequently, some '100MHz' rated memory is actually 10ns, which is NOT the pc-100 standard of 8ns - which is actually capable of working on a bus up to 124... can you see what the marketing gunises did to trick the community into thinking they were actually buying 124MHz memory(8ns)? They just milked some believers into paying 20 more bucks for the EXACT same memory as the 100MHz memory(8ns)! Knowledge is power. Laters...

------------------
Chad Wilson
C++/ASM Programmer
PC Support Technician

[Paleo Pete]

Did some digging, seems I was only partially right. On most systems the CPU bus and memory bus are essentially the same thing, and run at the same speed, but some boards, mostly newer ones, allow different memory bus speeds. These are the exception rather than the rule. (I think.)

Overclocking, by increasing the main or system bus speed, affects both, on most systems. The memory can be run at slower speeds, but can very likely cause problems when the bus is set to a faster speed than it is designed for.

I still don't completely understand it, the whole picture gets a bit involved, but I think that's basically it...

As for the original question, if both PC 100 and PC 133 are used, the bus would need to be set to 100MHz, to avoid overclocking the PC 100. Personally, as I stated in my first post, I would go for the 256MB PC133, that's enough for most typical home use situations.

------------------
Soon as I come up with all the answers...they change the questions!!

Computer Information Links (http://www.geocities.com/paleopete/)

[scada]

Xor your right except for one thing. The memory Bus is NOT the system bus. Do some digging and you'll find that the memory bus runs at a Multi of the Front side bus. For example some BIOS will let you set the Memory bus to run at:

Clock +33,Clock -33, Host Clock. ( this is just another way of saying...FSB*1.33,FSB*1,FSB*.33 if my math is correct)
the FSB or Front Side Bus is sometimes refered to as the System bus, but it's not the Memory bus. On Motherboards that support Intel chips it's hard to see the diff. But take a look at other boards and you see what I'm talking about.

I stand by my remarks http://www.PCGuide.com/ubb/smile.gif
Also don't take this the wrong way,But i have problems with your discussion on memory banks and there speed. I consider myself good at understanding chipset design. however I have never heard of a PC that can be overclocked by changing memory. Or how memory bank clock length (NS)can set your FSB speed. Also the speed of on die cache has nothing to do with the FSB but is itself a multi of the internal speed of the processor. Increasing the clock "speed" of the processor( either by increasing the FSB or change the multiplie) can cause problems with cache.this may be the wrong forum for this discusion. But I'm sorry you lose me there. perhaps I read it wrong.

[This message has been edited by scada (edited 11-29-2000).]

[This message has been edited by scada (edited 11-30-2000).]

[scada]

XOR you seem to be a good tech and know what your talking about. However, If as you say the system bus is the memory bus. Then the speed of all other buses (AGP,PCI) would change evertime you changed the speed of your memory. And that just isn't true. The cpu talks to memory via the Northbridge chip. Which is in turn "talking" to the AGP bus, PCI bus, and MEMORY BUS.

But mabey I have it all wrong. If you could point me to articles that validate your point of view. Perhaps I would have a better understanding.

Thanks and again don't take this as an attack on you. I just have to make sure that any every I is dotted. And all tech. info is correct for other readers whenever my "name" is in the list. http://www.PCGuide.com/ubb/smile.gif

[This message has been edited by scada (edited 11-30-2000).]

[xor_chad]

Scada,

Let me address your comments one by one.
************************************************** ************************
"The memory Bus is NOT the system bus"

When the "system clock" is referred to generically, it normally refers to the speed of the memory bus running on the motherboard (and not usually that of the processor)...The entire system is tied to the speed of the system clock
www.pcguide.com/ref/cpu/arch/extClocks-c.html (http://www.pcguide.com/ref/cpu/arch/extClocks-c.html)

By the way, FSB is the main memory bus.
************************************************** *************************

"For example some BIOS will let you set the Memory bus to run at:"

While i was doing RMA for a company for over a year i used ONE motherboard for PII & PIIs. The IWIll BD100+. This motherbord has that feature and i even make reference to it in this (http://www.pcguide.com/ubb/Forum3/HTML/000122.html) thread.
************************************************** *************************

"however I have never heard of a PC that can be overclocked by changing memory"

You must have mis-read something. Let me hilight the key words for that sentence:

This is why putting 100MHz/8ns memory on a MB with a P-50(like you would ever see this happen) would not cause your pc to overclock - the memory would simply transfer data at much slower rates than it is capable of.

I never stated otherwise. This is the foundation for the entire thread. I am trying to get the point across that the memory will not be any faster unless you change the bus speed to 133. which will also increase the CPU to 930(133*7) - UNLESS his MB supports the feature similar to the IWill.
************************************************** *************************

"Or how memory bank clock length (NS)can set your FSB speed"

The access time is the reciprocal of the Bus Speed.
Here is something from PCGuide:

Today's memory normally has access time ranging from 5 to 70 nanoseconds. This is the speed of the DRAM memory itself. www.pcguide.com/ref/ram/timingAccess-c.html (http://www.pcguide.com/ref/ram/timingAccess-c.html)
************************************************** *************************

"Also the speed of on die cache has nothing to do with the FSB but is itself a multi of the internal speed of the processor"

Heres some background. On the Pentium CPU's with the L2 cache on the card, not on die; the ram is limited to a 300MHz bus. It cannot access any faster. So when ppl started over-clocking these CPUs pst 600(l2 cache ran at 1/2 sys clock) then they would crap out. To get around this you could disable the L2 cache with the BIOS settings.

So if you happen to change your FSB to 133 and clock your L2 cache past 300, crash. Thats why they went on-die. It can go past 300MHz. Understand now?
************************************************** *************************

I think that cover everything. I am sorry i didnt make myself clear the first time. I have no problem clarifying my statements. And i have no problem being told i am wrong, even tho at this point i dont see that as the case. We all learn and in the process have to unlearn some things to.
Let me know if something still seems wrong or un clear. Laters...

------------------
Chad Wilson
C++/ASM Programmer
PC Support Technician

[This message has been edited by xor_chad (edited 11-30-2000).]

[This message has been edited by xor_chad (edited 11-30-2000).]

[scada]

Thanks for clearing that up. As I said I was not sure I read your post correctly. That why I wanted to see if you could point out what you were saying.

I am not here to prove how big a geek I am. (who really cares) Nor do I like to do a lot of typing.
But I have found that the best way to get someone to answer back with more details is to misunderstand what they were trying to say even if it makes me seem wrong or points out how wrong I am. ( I don't really care about my online rep just so long as the information is correct and easy to understand)

Agian Thanks

http://www.PCGuide.com/ubb/smile.gif



[This message has been edited by scada (edited 11-30-2000).]

[xor_chad]

Hey Scada
I dont think you are stupid or anything negative. Your rep is OK by me.
You simply didnt understand something i said and wanted it clarified.
I am glad you got something out of all this http://www.PCGuide.com/ubb/smile.gif
You gotta ask questions when you dont understand, else you never get it. Laters...

------------------
Chad Wilson
C++/ASM Programmer
PC Support Technician

[Paleo Pete]

Interesting and informative dabate, but let's not turn it into an argument, don't want anyone angry...I want both you guys to stick around, you both have offered a lot of very helpful assistance on the forums, and either would be missed if an argument started and one or the other simply left. So let's please keep it peaceful...

That said, we all got tied up in the technical issues and overlooked something...somewhere in the last few posts a request was made for suggestions for a benchmark program. The only one I've used is WinTune, which I think is available at Winmag (http://wintune.winmag.com/).

Any other suggestions?

------------------
Soon as I come up with all the answers...they change the questions!!

Computer Information Links (http://www.geocities.com/paleopete/)

[Shady24]

Sheesh! I think I gotta headache!

Thanks guys, VERY nice debate!

[scada]

Guess I got caught up in the moment. But I did learn some new stuff. That's why the forums are so cool.

Anyway, for bench marks I use 3Dmark2000 which is made by madonion.com and is good at benchmarking graphics cards.

And good old Sandra( don't know who make's it).

There are some others which benchmark processors ( or different parts of them ) but I've never gotten around to trying one of them.

3dmark is my fav. because I can upload my results to the madonion web site and compare them to others.

Sandra is used alot around the web some say it's good, others say it's not so good. ( I like it, but I'm new to the bechmarking game so mabey there is a better program out there. I just haven't run into it yet)

[Shady24]

I d/l 3dmark2000. Weird though. I ran it with my 192 MB of PC100 memory and got a benchmark of 4700. Then I installed the 256 of PC133 and got a bench of 4100! Why? Then I installed the other 128 chip of PC100 and left the Sdram freq. at 133 and get a bench of 4300. I have no idea how benchmarks work, and now I have no idea whats going on. Anyway, now I have 384 of memory and THATS how ITS STAYING! LOL

Thanks for all the feedback.

Shady