1. Welcome to TechPowerUp Forums, Guest! Please check out our forum guidelines for info related to our community.

Whats faster, more FSB or a higher multi?

Discussion in 'Overclocking & Cooling' started by ShadowFold, May 16, 2008.

  1. ShadowFold

    ShadowFold New Member

    Joined:
    Dec 23, 2007
    Messages:
    16,919 (7.33/day)
    Thanks Received:
    1,644
    Location:
    Omaha, NE
    Im just wondering if 400 x 8 or 337 x 9.5 is a faster 3.2ghz or are they the same?
  2. Solaris17

    Solaris17 Creator Solaris Utility DVD

    Joined:
    Aug 16, 2005
    Messages:
    16,905 (5.34/day)
    Thanks Received:
    3,424
    Location:
    Florida
    higher fsb
    ShadowFold says thanks.
  3. erocker

    erocker Super Moderator Staff Member

    Joined:
    Jul 19, 2006
    Messages:
    39,142 (13.83/day)
    Thanks Received:
    13,591
    A higher FSB would equal more performance.
    ShadowFold says thanks.
  4. niko084

    niko084

    Joined:
    Dec 5, 2006
    Messages:
    7,635 (2.84/day)
    Thanks Received:
    729
    Higher FSB and because it affects more than your processor.
    ShadowFold says thanks.
  5. imperialreign

    imperialreign New Member

    Joined:
    Jul 19, 2007
    Messages:
    7,043 (2.85/day)
    Thanks Received:
    909
    Location:
    Sector ZZ₉ Plural Z Alpha
    agreed, better overall system performance from a higher BUS.

    unless you do a lot of task and applications that are CPU-only intensive, higher CPU clock isn't as effective of a performance gain.
    ShadowFold says thanks.
  6. spearman914

    spearman914 New Member

    Joined:
    Apr 14, 2008
    Messages:
    3,339 (1.52/day)
    Thanks Received:
    502
    Location:
    Brooklyn, New York 11223
    Higher FSB. Because the FSB affects other components too but multi only affects the cpu.
    ShadowFold says thanks.
  7. hat

    hat Maximum Overclocker

    Joined:
    Nov 20, 2006
    Messages:
    16,820 (6.21/day)
    Thanks Received:
    2,032
    Location:
    Ohio
    MOAR FSB
    even if you had settings that had everything running at stock except for the CPU and FSB, same speed on the CPU produced by both settings... moar fsb wins
    ShadowFold says thanks.
  8. ShadowFold

    ShadowFold New Member

    Joined:
    Dec 23, 2007
    Messages:
    16,919 (7.33/day)
    Thanks Received:
    1,644
    Location:
    Omaha, NE
    Thanks
  9. HTC

    HTC

    Joined:
    Apr 1, 2008
    Messages:
    2,208 (1.00/day)
    Thanks Received:
    299
    Unless you have very good RAM, a higher FSB will mean higher timings for the RAM which will actually slow you down.
  10. spearman914

    spearman914 New Member

    Joined:
    Apr 14, 2008
    Messages:
    3,339 (1.52/day)
    Thanks Received:
    502
    Location:
    Brooklyn, New York 11223
    Also higher fsb will need more voltages which will decreasing liftime which is a bad thing....
  11. hat

    hat Maximum Overclocker

    Joined:
    Nov 20, 2006
    Messages:
    16,820 (6.21/day)
    Thanks Received:
    2,032
    Location:
    Ohio
    Higher speed doesn't always warrant higher voltages.
  12. HTC

    HTC

    Joined:
    Apr 1, 2008
    Messages:
    2,208 (1.00/day)
    Thanks Received:
    299
    Totally right, dude!

    That's why there aren't many x * 7 multi overclocks out there! Even with good RAM, those wouldn't last very long (unless they were low OCs).
  13. SirKeldon

    SirKeldon New Member

    Joined:
    Feb 7, 2008
    Messages:
    489 (0.22/day)
    Thanks Received:
    154
    Location:
    Barcelona, Catalonia (Spain)
    It is the same thing for Intel and AMD? Cause i know their architechtures are different in the FSB implementation, a higher FSB is always better?

    Ty in advance :toast:
  14. zCexVe

    zCexVe

    Joined:
    Apr 25, 2007
    Messages:
    417 (0.16/day)
    Thanks Received:
    30
    Location:
    Los Angeles,CA
    In AMD they always win in Bandwidth with their more superior Hyper Transport.
    SirKeldon says thanks.
  15. Solaris17

    Solaris17 Creator Solaris Utility DVD

    Joined:
    Aug 16, 2005
    Messages:
    16,905 (5.34/day)
    Thanks Received:
    3,424
    Location:
    Florida
    yes higher FSB is better regardless of architecture..because its over all system bandwidth not just ram or proc...the diff you may be thinking of is timings...from what i here AMD likes tigher timings were as intel it doesnt matter so much
    SirKeldon says thanks.
  16. farlex85

    farlex85 New Member

    Joined:
    Mar 29, 2007
    Messages:
    4,830 (1.87/day)
    Thanks Received:
    638
    Intel's FSB is the chokepoint for the whole system. All the information from ram to cpu and cpu to everything must pass through the fsb. Getting that as high as possible is more important than tight timings. Of course, RAM is a key factor and if it is working very ineffectively, then sacrificing a little fsb for RAM performance is good. Its a balance.

    AMD does not have a FSB sirkeldon. Their procs communicate directly w/ the ram via HT i believe, however I am not as familiar w/ their architecture.
    HTC says thanks.
  17. niko084

    niko084

    Joined:
    Dec 5, 2006
    Messages:
    7,635 (2.84/day)
    Thanks Received:
    729
    Your correct Farlex85!

    This is part of the reason AMD you want tight timings and don't need such massive bandwidth for equal performance.
  18. HTC

    HTC

    Joined:
    Apr 1, 2008
    Messages:
    2,208 (1.00/day)
    Thanks Received:
    299
    That's why, in my case, with RAM @ 5-5-5-15 @ 1062 MHz is actually slower then RAM @ 4-4-4-10 @ 884 MHz, even though Everest says otherwise (difference of about 400 in memory read). In Nero Recode, it's slightly faster with 884 then 1062: about 12 seconds.
  19. jbruneau

    jbruneau New Member

    Joined:
    Apr 28, 2008
    Messages:
    98 (0.04/day)
    Thanks Received:
    28
    Location:
    Ontario, Canada
    I agree, a higher FSB would benefit a system more than simply using a higher multiplier. Now, both on the other hand would be even better!

    HAT, I'm with you, an overclock does not always involve added voltage. Though, with sufficient cooling, the additional voltage will not affect shelf-life in any way.

    As for those worried about memory, that is why they invented dividers. You can run your memory faster than the FSB, the same speed, or slower. Run the crap out of them, drop some more voltage, active cooling and get those timings down. Either that or run them stock. Whichever is your preference.
  20. Ravenas

    Ravenas

    Joined:
    May 24, 2007
    Messages:
    4,629 (1.83/day)
    Thanks Received:
    343
    Location:
    Tennessee
    This is the truth. Both are the best for the greatest overall performance boost.
  21. trog100 New Member

    Joined:
    Dec 18, 2005
    Messages:
    4,420 (1.45/day)
    Thanks Received:
    237
    the important thing is to get the cpu speed up.. useing a higher multiplier is just an easier way to do this without stressing the rest of the less important bits or adding more instability problems than u have to..

    but in theory (in a perfect world) everything should be as fast as possible but higher cpu speed is the best performance gain.. the rest is secondary and might cause more problems than its worth for any small additional gains..

    trog
  22. Wile E

    Wile E Power User

    Joined:
    Oct 1, 2006
    Messages:
    24,324 (8.82/day)
    Thanks Received:
    3,776
    With his board, 400fsb is a non-issue. So 400x8 is better either way.
  23. hat

    hat Maximum Overclocker

    Joined:
    Nov 20, 2006
    Messages:
    16,820 (6.21/day)
    Thanks Received:
    2,032
    Location:
    Ohio
    excessive voltage will shorten the life no matter what the cooling is. If I had one of those uber leet xigmatek coolers and I lived in the north pole, I could still run 1.6v through my processor all the time and knock some life off it.
  24. Solaris17

    Solaris17 Creator Solaris Utility DVD

    Joined:
    Aug 16, 2005
    Messages:
    16,905 (5.34/day)
    Thanks Received:
    3,424
    Location:
    Florida
    thats absolutely true hat..but with how fast most of this community change parts it usually isnt an issue.

Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guest)

Share This Page