DIGIT-ARC read-only archive · snapshot: July 23, 2026

Odd bus speeds on Athlon64 3000+

50 posts · originally from https://geek.digit.in/community/threads/odd-bus-speeds-on-athlon64-3000.35079/

D
drvarunmehta Original post #1
Aug 27, 2006 at 7:20 PM
*img167.imageshack.us/img167/5093/cpugd8.jpg
I can't seem to understand why the bus speed is 199 MHz rather than 200 MHz. I haven't changed anything from the BIOS and my mobo dosen't even support OCing. See the config in the siggy.
A
akshayt #2
Aug 27, 2006 at 7:30 PM
Was this from the time of purchase or has it happened out of the blue?

Is the PC performing as fast as it should?

Check these things with some other tool or software as well.

If 'Yes' to these 2 questions:

Enter bios and reset the settings, this should reset the voltage to auto and take up around 1.4V and it would change the multiplier to 9x. Other things are fine anyway.
dOm1naTOr
Aug 27, 2006 at 7:50 PM
U have underclocked your system. The cpu is running in .99 Ghz instead of 1.8 Ghz. U r getting only the perfomance of a sempron 2600+ by now.
Do as given below.
Get into ur bios.
Navigate to CPU multiplier and set it to 9x and cpu bus speed to 200Mhz. So u get the original speed of a 3000+, ie 1.8Ghz. (200x9).
Anything higher than that ic ocing, like 10x multiplier and 200 bus, so effective 200x10=2.0Ghz. Or multiplier set to 9x and bus to 225, so effective 2.05 Ghz. Like that.

U SHOULD AT LEAST SET THE ORIGINAL SPEED OF CPU, ie MAKE IT TO 1.8Ghz.
samrulez
Aug 27, 2006 at 7:55 PM
aravind_n20 said:
U have underclocked your system. The cpu is running in .99 Ghz instead of 1.8 Ghz. U r getting only the perfomance of a sempron 2600+ by now.
Do as given below.
Get into ur bios.
Navigate to CPU multiplier and set it to 9x and cpu bus speed to 200Mhz. So u get the original speed of a 3000+, ie 1.8Ghz. (200x9).
Anything higher than that ic ocing, like 10x multiplier and 200 bus, so effective 200x10=2.0Ghz. Or multiplier set to 9x and bus to 225, so effective 2.05 Ghz. Like that.

U SHOULD AT LEAST SET THE ORIGINAL SPEED OF CPU, ie MAKE IT TO 1.8Ghz.



lol.....:D...no.....he has enabled Cool 'n' Quiet.....:D

@drvarunmehta:.....is the 199MHz constant.....coz all the buses on the mobo/chipste keep jumping around 1MHz or 2MHz....
dOm1naTOr
Aug 27, 2006 at 7:55 PM
Wow Ive heard dat cool n quite slows down ur machine, so never turned on...Its totally Bulls**t...who would wanna run a system at half the speed for minimising noise??????
Also @ drvarunmehta
Can u tell your CPU nd system temp at these extreme cool clocks????

Nd dun set your CPU voltage to 1.4. Set it to 1.3 or even 1.35 as AMD recomented one is 1.3v. Also please give your CPU fan speed at idle nd load.
D
Aug 27, 2006 at 7:56 PM
@arvind: That's only Cool'n'Quiet doing it's job. the PC hits 1780 MHz under load. I'm not concerned with the clock speed. It's the bus speed thats odd.

@akshayt: It's from the time I bought the PC but I just never bothered about it till now. All benchmarks are as good as they should be.
samrulez
Aug 27, 2006 at 8:04 PM
aravind_n20 said:
Wow Ive heard dat cool n quite slows down ur machine, so never turned on...Its totally Bulls**t...who would wanna run a system at half the speed for minimising noise??????
Also @ drvarunmehta
Can u tell your CPU nd system temp at these extreme cool clocks????
x2ev8.png[/IMG][/URL]

C&Q is not constant......if u r only say..surfin the net using firefox then u don't need 1.8GHz....all u need is 1GHz....so...it slows down the procey so that it runs cooler and quieter.......

As soon as u run....F.E.A.R!! or and extensive application....it will pump it back to 1.8GHz.
D
Aug 27, 2006 at 8:11 PM
CPU temps are quite low and fan speeds ar 2-3k rpm. I just restored the BIOS to factory settings but it dosen't help.
@arvind: Bus speed is a constant 199 MHz.
dOm1naTOr
Aug 27, 2006 at 8:46 PM
@drvarunmehta
why r u concerned bout bus speed. Its 199 na nd its nomal is 200. U would never notice any diff if u make it 200 nd it won't give u even 1 single point in any benchmarks.

Dun know bout MSI RS 480 board but even ASUS A8N VM can crank bus upto 240 nd for A8NE u can crank upto hell!!!!400MHZ.
deathvirus_me
Aug 28, 2006 at 3:02 AM
Well , at stock , my bus speed at 201.2 MHz .. so its quite normal for the bus speed to be 1 MHz more or less from the standard value ...
dOm1naTOr
dOm1naTOr #11
Aug 28, 2006 at 8:00 AM
Yaa dun worry bout bus speed, but what u have to concern is the CPU clock speed. Disable the cool n quite nd crank it up to 1.8.

@deathvirus_me
how did u increase the mem clock by 4mhz??Ive the option only of 433 after 400. Also plz give ur temp readings.
deathvirus_me
Aug 28, 2006 at 12:09 PM
how did u increase the mem clock by 4mhz??Ive the option only of 433 after 400. Also plz give ur temp readings.

I downclocked to ddr33 , increased the FSB from 200 to 242 .. ram wen from 166 to 201.9 ... so its ddr404 now .. :D
A
akshayt #13
Aug 28, 2006 at 2:00 PM
disable cool&quiet
Rollercoaster
Aug 28, 2006 at 3:48 PM
1 or 2 MHz deviation is very normal....
dOm1naTOr
dOm1naTOr #15
Aug 28, 2006 at 8:50 PM
@deathvirus_me
but i usually keep mem clock at 400 nd increased the fsb, but on windows the mem clocks is showed as somethin around 400 only...why so??
But mem clocks won't make much perfomance diff as cpu clock, so not much worried of it.
deathvirus_me
Aug 29, 2006 at 7:51 PM
but i usually keep mem clock at 400 nd increased the fsb, but on windows the mem clocks is showed as somethin around 400 only...why so??
But mem clocks won't make much perfomance diff as cpu clock, so not much worried of it.

Well .. ur mem. clocks directly affect the total mem. bandwidth .. for example , ddr440 will have better mem. read/write/latencies than ddr400 at stock ...
mobilegeek
Aug 29, 2006 at 9:26 PM
Is Cool-N-Quiet recommened ?? ... I mean should we enable it .. if we just have to do simple work, no gaming n ripping?
D
Aug 29, 2006 at 10:14 PM
If you aren't into heavy CPU usage like gaming or encoding, you should enable Cool-N-Quiet. It lets your processor run cooler and saves on power. You won't experience any decrease in performance either.
mobilegeek
Aug 29, 2006 at 11:51 PM
generally the work is simple .. but sometimes the ripping n gaming
.. in that case just reboot n change everytime .. or keep it enabled
D
Aug 30, 2006 at 12:06 AM
Keep it enabled. When it needs more power, the processor will automatically run at it's full potential.
Even if you want to disable it, there's no need to even reboot. You can change the settings from within Windows itself.
dOm1naTOr
dOm1naTOr #21
Aug 30, 2006 at 8:03 PM
Whuch is better:
DDR at 333 @2-3-2-6
or
DDR at 400@3-3-3-8 ???
Im running in dual channel.
dOm1naTOr
dOm1naTOr #23
Aug 30, 2006 at 10:32 PM
Ya now Im at 230 mhz @3-4-3-7 in dual ch.
Now how to test/bench mem bandwidth [dun say sisoft sandra-its fails to open even after many reinstall].
G
geekgod #24
Aug 31, 2006 at 1:19 AM
@aravind_n20
download everest..
there's an option to benchmark your ram..gives your read,write and copy bandwidths and latency..

however..i'd suggest you check you ram for stability using memest86+ at these speds, if you havent already done so.
deathvirus_me
Aug 31, 2006 at 1:36 AM
Everest is the better option for me .. results are easier to compare ..
mobilegeek
Aug 31, 2006 at 3:07 AM
geekgod said:
@aravind_n20
download everest..
there's an option to benchmark your ram..gives your read,write and copy bandwidths and latency..

however..i'd suggest you check you ram for stability using memest86+ at these speds, if you havent already done so.
man memest86+ 3.5 takes ages to end ... how much time did yours took wen you checked ram, did it show errors
G
geekgod #27
Sep 1, 2006 at 12:30 AM
it will take about 20 mins max..

in my machine it took about 17-18 mins for a single pass..i ran at least two passes.

the max stable clock i could get was 220..@2.5-3-3-8.above that it gave errors. might have gone higher if i had loosened them a bit more or pumped a bit more volts, but temps became very high.also it is better not to loosen timings too much on an athlon64 syste..the on die memory controller likes them tight..:)

also check if you are running the rams at 1T or 2T. you may get higher clocks at 2T, but that doesnt help performance.

it is mandatory to run memtest86+ if u r oc'ing ur ram. might very dangerous for your data if you are running ur system with unstable ram.
deathvirus_me
Sep 1, 2006 at 1:27 AM
Well , 2T helps to gain in performance in these conditions :

(i) If ur using 2 GB or more RAM , specially or AMD system
(ii) If ur running 2 GB or more RAM in dual channel

Also .. 2,3,3,6 always won't perform better than 2,3,3,8 .. coz if ur running 2 GB or more in dual channel , and ur ram has a higher rating like ddr400 , then 2,3,3,8 will give better mem. performance ... and on nForce 4 chipsets , values above 8 may result in even better performance .. for example u can try 2,3,3,10 ...
dOm1naTOr
dOm1naTOr #29
Sep 1, 2006 at 2:19 AM
I get the read/write nd latency score like:
5365/1854/62.4ns
and the scores of
cpu qn/cpo photo wrx/cpu zlib/fpu julia/mandel/Sinjulia as:
4594/19100/30167kbps/2852/4342/2627
Is this scores good nd seems normal.
G
geekgod #30
Sep 1, 2006 at 2:47 AM
deathvirus_me said:
Well , 2T helps to gain in performance in these conditions :

(i) If ur using 2 GB or more RAM , specially or AMD system
(ii) If ur running 2 GB or more RAM in dual channel

Also .. 2,3,3,6 always won't perform better than 2,3,3,8 .. coz if ur running 2 GB or more in dual channel , and ur ram has a higher rating like ddr400 , then 2,3,3,8 will give better mem. performance ... and on nForce 4 chipsets , values above 8 may result in even better performance .. for example u can try 2,3,3,10 ...
what u said is not entirely correct..

command rate of 2T doesnt always translate into better performance..but in some cases into better stability. the performance lag..if any.. wont be noticeable if there is a large amount of ram available.
for athlon64 systems..lower command rate is always preferable..simply because of the fact that because of the on die memory controller,the time needed between successive commands is much less.so a 2T timing( 1 command per two clock cycle) is not necessary.its not that it is always bad..just not necessary.
intel on the other hand..locks the command rate to 2T on its motherboards as the system is more stable at that timing.

same for the tRAS timing..if it is too high, it is not that the performance will always be hampered.though in most cases it will be..bt the controller has to wait for more that it needs to. again that wait wont be evident for a large amount of ram.
__________
latency is high..but thats normal as you are using loose timings for the first three values. tighten them all within 2.5-3 and latency is bound to rise within 50 ns.
in my system with timings of 2-3-3-7..latency is 48.1 ns.

as for the other readings, please tell whether they are for read, write or copy. 1854 seems too low.
dOm1naTOr
dOm1naTOr #31
Sep 1, 2006 at 12:05 PM
Ya now ive reached 2.5-3-3-6 @230mhz at 1T.
now read/write/lateccy are
5956/2250/49.7
@geekgod
what is the expected score for write for Athlon 64 based system?
A
akshayt #32
Sep 1, 2006 at 12:37 PM
why have youdisabled ncq, it helps man? and ow have you disabled ncq?
D
Sep 1, 2006 at 2:01 PM
NCQ is known to increase access times by unnecessarily increasing CPU overhead.
deathvirus_me
Sep 1, 2006 at 2:05 PM
Ya now ive reached 2.5-3-3-6 @230mhz at 1T.
now read/write/lateccy are
5956/2250/49.7

6023 / 4104 / 53.3 ... this is at 3,3,3,8 @ 202 MHz @ 2T .... now don't tell me i've good mem. modules coz i don't ...

same for the tRAS timing..if it is too high, it is not that the performance will always be hampered.though in most cases it will be..bt the controller has to wait for more that it needs to. again that wait wont be evident for a large amount of ram.

I beg to differ a bit .. higher tRAS means that there is a higher probability that the data written is not correct .. this may result in fetching the same data over repeated cycles , which in turn decreases performance .. from 6 -> 8 i got a solid 150 MBps+ increase with my cheap mem. (mem. read / write ) .. and on a pentium rig , even more .. some people even use 10 ..

Also for AMD CPU's .. a lowered HTL can severely affect mem. performance (in a bad way i.e.) ...
dOm1naTOr
dOm1naTOr #35
Sep 1, 2006 at 2:45 PM
What r the values displayed for u in CPU z???
deathvirus_me
Sep 1, 2006 at 3:01 PM
CPUz Validation URL : *valid.x86-secret.com/show_oc?id=112909
G
geekgod #37
Sep 1, 2006 at 6:01 PM
man..by higher tRAS i didnt mean as high as 13-14..i meant near 10.:) with very high values..the mem perormance will obviously be degraded.

as about your ram benchmark..i think 6 is too low for the memory you are using. it will obviously perform much better at 8.my system doesnt boot or memtest shows errors if i go above ddr400 at values lower than 7..even though it is corsair..

my everest readings..

6178 |
5788 |--------->3-3-3-8 at 1T
51.60|


6053 |
4155 |--------->3-3-3-8 at 2T
57.80|

6181 |
5788 |--------->2-3-3-7 at 1T
47.90|

as you see,in my case,changing between 2-3-3-7 and 3-3-3-8 doesnt alter performance by much except by decreasing the latency.but i think if i jhad better memory and could boot stably at 6..there woud have been a difference.
but changing it to 2T affects the overall performance in a bad way.
__________
@akshayt..
for disabling ncq go to device manager---->uncollapse the branch for ide controllers---->double click on srial ata controller.
in the dialog box that opens, go to the tab for the channel in which the drive you are disabling ncq for is attached and there uncheck "command queuing".restart your pc.

by disabling ncq..i got decrease in cpu utilization by about 2%, and gains in burst transfer rate, avg transfer rate and access times by about 20mbps, 6mbps and 5 ns resp..:). not much..but shows that disabling ncq helps.

ncq is useful if you are into heavy multitasking..as all it does is intelligently queue concurrent read/write requests considering the disk transfer rate, access times, process priority etc. it is especially useful if you are running a server. but for linear functions like file copy etc or for most of the works in a single user system..it is not of much help.
dOm1naTOr
dOm1naTOr #38
Sep 1, 2006 at 8:18 PM
Hey how did ya get that much high score on everest for mem write??The reference score of even an Athlon x2 4400+ is given as 2268: see the shot:
*img72.imageshack.us/img72/6392/everestjj8.jpg
samrulez
samrulez #39
Sep 1, 2006 at 8:32 PM
THAT'S COZ THE EVEREST VERSION U R USING IS OLD....
SEE THIS

*img118.imageshack.us/img118/7514/untitledjy1.jpg
dOm1naTOr
dOm1naTOr #40
Sep 2, 2006 at 2:27 AM
Now that Ive downloaded 3.01.652 nd here is the scores:
memread/write/copy/latecy: 7254/7386/5898/49.2 @2.5-3-3-6-1T @480MHZ in Dual channel. HTT at 960Mhz and CPU @2.64 Ghz.

And other benchies in the correct order as:
5072/20169/31234/3155/4916/2750
G
geekgod #41
Sep 2, 2006 at 9:16 AM
very good benchies..
but i'd suggest you complete at least two passes of memtest86+..even if you have to wait..passing the test guarantees ur ram is stable and ur data wont be screwed up..:)
dOm1naTOr
dOm1naTOr #42
Sep 2, 2006 at 11:42 PM
After the oc my windows bootup has become slower than usual. Ive not installed any softies in this period or changed any windows setings. Is it due to mem oc?
deathvirus_me
Sep 3, 2006 at 12:38 AM
Could be ... coz sometimes the oc'ed freq. may actually result in a decrease in performance. ..
dOm1naTOr
dOm1naTOr #44
Sep 3, 2006 at 2:31 PM
Ive reinstalled windows nd its back on track nd is faster than before..Actualy for the last 2 years Ive to reinstall the OS every month for running without any problem..same happened here.
Now looking for same model another 2x512 for making the total a 2GB, for more perfomance nd as a preperation for Vista.
Kniwor
Kniwor #45
Sep 3, 2006 at 10:52 PM
@aravind_n20
you will be sorry to learn that another pair of 512 Mb will not give u any performance boost, infact, it will drop the performance, u got A8N-E, as i see, u can hope to run them at 400Mhz if u get the same exact ram with same timings, and preferably same factory, otherwise, ur timings will drop, and so will the performance, if u wanna put in 2 Gb, sell this sticks and get 2x1Gb sticks to run in dual channel.
M
Mayur #46
Sep 3, 2006 at 11:30 PM
Man did you look at cpu multiplier
5X !!!! I have it default 9X
so 200*9=1800Mhz
So my processor runs at 1.8Ghz
D
Sep 4, 2006 at 12:03 AM
Oh my god, how many times do I have to say it?
I'll say it again.
Cool 'N' Quiet
Cool 'N' Quiet
Cool 'N' Quiet
Cool 'N' Quiet
Cool 'N' Quiet

deathvirus_me
Sep 4, 2006 at 6:22 PM
Which i'd seriously suggest to turn off ...
dOm1naTOr
dOm1naTOr #49
Sep 4, 2006 at 7:02 PM
Yaaaa ive beaten AMD FX 60 in all benchies on Sisoft Sandra nd everest with 4200@2.8Ghz. But FX 62 AM2 is soewhat tough as it too runs at 2.8 nd has DDR2 800Mhz.
deathvirus_me
Sep 5, 2006 at 9:07 PM
Ur oc'ed X2 4200+ is more like a X2 5000+ right now ... so ... + u've that uber cool oc'ed ram .. that helps a lot in mem. business . :D