Serious Memory Issue!

[Seth0385]

Hi, first of all, thanks for reading this and replying.

PC Specs:
AMD Athlon 2400+
160gig ATA133
Nforce2 Mobo
ATI9800xt

GEIL PC3200 512mb 6-3-3-2


OK my problem is this. I can only get my memory freq. to run at 133mhz. Am I wrong in thinking this should be able to run at 333mhz(166)? If I clear the cmos it defaults to a 1800+ and 200mhz memory freq. If I change the memory for FSB from 100mhz to 133mhz, and set speed from "SPD" to Auto. It will work fine. This will take my memory freq. down from 200mhz to 133mhz, but make my processor read as a 2400+.

Now shouldnt I be able to make this have a 166mhz FSB but have a 333mhz memory freq?

I've tried every Cas timeing known to man.

When I make it this:

FSB: 166mhz
Memory Speed: 200% (333mhz)

I get a memory error, about 15 different ones now.

I'm helpless, any responses even to call me retarded are appreciated!

 

[YeuEmMaiMai]

try setting the voltage higher on the ram. I had "166Mhz" ram that required the next higher voltage on my MB to run at that speed when running doom 3 so I would try that.

 

[wireframe]

Your Athlon XP 24000+ is a 133 FSB CPU. (133*15)

This is the default system clock and it makes little sense to run the memory clock faster than this. I believe the generally accepted theory on XPs is that it is best to run the memory synchronously (same clock) to the system clock rather than asynchronously.

Therefore, 133 FSB and 133 memory clock is the correct setting to use. To run the memory at 166 (333 effective) you would need to use a 5:4 memory divider (perhaps better thought of as a multiplier in this case). I don't think this is worth it even if possible as the memory controller must synchronize between the FSB and the memory clock, thereby losing any gains you would otherwise see from 66 more MHz (effective).

The memory, being PC-3200, is able to run at 200MHz clock (400 effective).

If I change the memory for FSB from 100mhz to 133mhz, and set speed from "SPD" to Auto. It will work fine. This will take my memory freq. down from 200mhz to 133mhz, but make my processor read as a 2400+.

This is a bit confusing because isn't this exactly what you would expect? CPU running at right speed with the synchronous memory clock.

The reason you are getting errors at 166 MHz memory clock is because you are probably still running synchronously to the FSB (1:1) and thereby overclocking your CPU (166*15 = 2.490 MHz).

 

[digitalwanderer]

Your Athlon XP 24000+ is a 133 FSB CPU. (133*15)

This is the default system clock and it makes little sense to run the memory clock faster than this. I believe the generally accepted theory on XPs is that it is best to run the memory synchronously (same clock) to the system clock rather than asynchronously.

Huh? Really? I always ran my XPs around 10-12x200.

 

[wireframe]

Huh? Really? I always ran my XPs around 10-12x200.

Could it be a case of multiple CPU configurations with the same 2400+ name? (Thoroughbred v Barton for example) There is definitely a 2400+ @ 15*133. I ran a search before replying.

 

[YeuEmMaiMai]

the Athlon 2400+ can be either 133 or 166fsb. I had a MB that would set my 2500M+ 333fsb but in reality it was a 266fsb cpu. It was only after a BIOS update I was able to set it properly. The chip had no problem running at 333FSB and still does so to this day.

 

[wireframe]

the Athlon 2400+ can be either 133 or 166fsb. I had a MB that would set my 2500M+ 333fsb but in reality it was a 266fsb cpu. It was only after a BIOS update I was able to set it properly. The chip had no problem running at 333FSB and still does so to this day.

Ok, if you are sure about those double configurations for the 2400+ (133 and 166 FSB), I think we have our solution. In this case it would seem to be a 133 FSB part we are talking about as running at that system clock correctly identifies the CPU as a 2400+.

 

[YeuEmMaiMai]

Ok, if you are sure about those double configurations for the 2400+ (133 and 166 FSB), I think we have our solution. In this case it would seem to be a 133 FSB part we are talking about as running at that system clock correctly identifies the CPU as a 2400+.

In my experience I have found that when you have CPU that is overclocked and not really stable you will usually get instruciton errors in NT based OS if it successfully loads and if you have memory problems you get lockup and crashes.

 

[Seth0385]

thanks for the replys. I really thought my cpu was the 166mhz one. Maybe not though. Oh well, i need to build a new pc anyways.