View Full Version : What does it mean when AMD has a FSB that's....
Send_Derek
April 20th, 2005, 03:03 PM
What does it mean when AMD has a FSB that's integrated into chip?
Just a simple question, but I figured I would ask...
hadi
April 20th, 2005, 03:08 PM
http://www.hardwaremonkey.com/cpu/2600/2600p1.asp
Send_Derek
April 20th, 2005, 04:56 PM
Well, I read through that, but I don't think it helped answer my question. Interesting read though...
iceni60
April 20th, 2005, 07:27 PM
hi, Send_Derek :)
AMD=Advanced Micro Devices, which is a chip manufacturer
FSB= Frontside Bus
so it means that the chip manufacturer Advanced Micro Device's chip has an integrated Frontside Bus. i think it means you will have a faster data transfer and greater memory capacity
The Frontside and Backside Buses connect to the CPU then all the other components are linked to them. in the past the Frontside Bus ran at a slower speed then the BSB so all the components linked from it will run slower and slower as you go farther down the connections. with the integrated Frontside Bus it means it will be running at the same speed as the main memory so all the other components will run faster too.
this isn't fact, it's just what i think going from what i have learned in the first few weeks of my college course
Firecat
April 20th, 2005, 09:49 PM
The AMD Athlon64 CPU has all the functions of a dedicated NorthBridge right on the CPU. Therefore the FSB is part of the CPU, and its good that way because the HyperTransport technology allows for very low latencies leading to quite high performance.
anotherquestion
April 20th, 2005, 11:02 PM
Can I ask a further question then? If the cpu now has the FSB then why do motherboards for the AMD Athlon 64 still advertise having a FSB? Or is the FSB on the motherboard an entirely different thing? Thanks.
iceni60
April 21st, 2005, 12:21 AM
-{ Quote: "Can I ask a further question then? If the cpu now has the FSB then why do motherboards for the AMD Athlon 64 still advertise having a FSB? Or is the FSB on the motherboard an entirely different thing? Thanks." }-
i think it is probably not a FSB (when intergrated), but does the job of one. it is easier to say it is, then go on to explain how much more powerful the new chip designed with the intergrated FSB is.
so, i'd say, yes the FSB on the motherboard is an entirely different thing :)
i haven't read any AMD Athlon 64 advertising, so sorry if i have misunderstood.
Firecat
April 21st, 2005, 02:24 AM
http://www.amd.com/us-en/Processors/ProductInformation/0,,30_118_9485_9487%5E9492,00.html
This clearly shows that the FSB functions are handled by the HyperTransport technology on the Athlon64 CPUs.
Send_Derek
April 21st, 2005, 11:34 AM
Well, thanks for the help guys! I was just curious.
What type of RAM would you pair up with an AMD CPU that has the integrated up to 2000Mhz? Would you just go for the quickest stuff you could? Or is there something more to it during the build of a computer?
Firecat
April 21st, 2005, 11:51 AM
Well, getting RAM to run beyond 400MHz memory on AMD Athlon64s is a tough job.
On these CPUs, the RAM Frequency depends on the CPU FSB.
If the FSB is 400MHz, RAM frequency of 400MHz is possible.
FSB=200x2 MHz (dual-pumped 200MHz, therefore it appears to be 200MHz in system info apps)
RAM at DDR 400MHz = 200x2 (same as CPU).
You'll have to overclock the FSB if you have to raise the RAM speed.
Infinity
April 21st, 2005, 11:53 AM
cas latency is not that important for amd chipsets.
but the rule remains: the lower the latency: the faster you go (the more expensive it is though)
Firecat
April 21st, 2005, 11:54 AM
-{ Quote: "cas latency is not that important for amd chipsets.
but the rule remains: the lower the latency: the faster you go (the more expensive it is though)" }-
CAS latency is not important for AMD because of the HyperTransport terminal which is able to provide low-latency data transmission across the system.
Infinity
April 21st, 2005, 12:21 PM
FC, the way I see it: it still has some importance (latency) but it is of less importance then with Intel...
I hope they will begin with supporting for ddr2...that would be awesome for gamers and overclockers...
I read somewhere on some forum that AMD is working on a new core but I cannot remember it anymore which one :) But they said it will be better then Winchester core...
we'll see cause I am seriously considering purchasing an amd64...no more Intel for me after this one :D
vBulletin® Copyright ©2000-2012, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2002 - 2012, Wilders Security Forums