Jump to content
HWBOT Community Forums

Recommended Posts

Posted

Right or wrong, all submissions should be done the same way. I'm sorry, but your calculation should not be recognized......at least not in the middle of a competition. Mods should clarify if this is legit or not.

Posted

This "wrong speed" issue only applies to the KT133 chipset (and perhaps few other VIA sdram-based chipsets using other than 1:1 mem:fsb ratio). Intel 440BX, 815 and 845 RAM speed detection works just fine in both CPU-Z and Aida64 (and therefore shows the same value). I am the only one using this platform, so I don't see a problem here. This score is 100% comparable with others. Anyway... only i815 or i845 based MB can score high enough to win this stage. I have neither of them, so I try to score as high as possible with A7V133.

If mods say this score is invalid, then I will remove it and buy some CPU-Z compatible board.

  • Crew
Posted

Scotty, this is clearly a CPU-Z issue. What CPU-Z represents as FSB+33 is in fact FSB+PCI and while you're on default, it's the same. You know better that these KT133 use sync clocks and overclocking the bus overclocks the PCI bus too.

 

A similar bug you have with dual P2 clocks (though, I do understand that your case didn't affect the total score).

Posted (edited)

Is this max of these mems or chipset? On KT266A i was able to reach max ~182 MHz on ram. Via has an interesting "-33" and "+33" memory set. As far as I remember KT133, KT133A, KT266A has this "multiplier". Old VIAs are not well-compatible with CPUz. Intel i815 is the best for SDRAM. It's possible to buy a cheap mobo eg. cusl2. It has also 2:3 multiplier for ram. BTW I was looking for SIS chipset based mobos, some of them can work with SDRAM at 3-4-4 timings :)

Edited by ludek
Posted

Antinomy:

Well said, thank you.

 

ludek111:

I am not really sure. I don't have cusl2 at the moment, so I can't test this mem propertly. Last year I tried ECS P4S5A/DX+ and maximum validation was somewhere around 180 MHz as well. However SiS chipset is incompatible even with Aida64. I could only estimate RAM speed by FSB clock and memory divider. This SDRAM module is Infineon 256MB, PC 133 CL2, BX compatible (16 chip). I assume its not that good compared to modern high-density modules. Maybe BGA chips are the best.

  • Crew
Posted (edited)

Mr. Scott, there already was such an issue but the other way around - when CPU-Z showed a higher divider whereas a lower was in use. Results were marked as invalid and recalculated despite CPU-Z showing higher numbers. It was a Gigabyte P35 or P45 issue with 1:2 (and 3:5 for real).

 

Just've recalled this one. But too young for memory issues :D

Edited by Antinomy
Posted
Mr. Scott, there already was such an issue but the other way around - when CPU-Z showed a higher divider whereas a lower was in use. Results were marked as invalid and recalculated despite CPU-Z showing higher numbers. It was a Gigabyte P35 or P45 issue with 1:2 (and 3:5 for real).

Yes, I know about the 3:5 issue. ;)

  • Crew
Posted
Mr. Scott, there already was such an issue but the other way around - when CPU-Z showed a higher divider whereas a lower was in use. Results were marked as invalid and recalculated despite CPU-Z showing higher numbers. It was a Gigabyte P35 or P45 issue with 1:2 (and 3:5 for real).

 

3:5 divider on 400 strap is bugged on all P35/P45/X38/X48 boards, and it is 2:3 in reality. ;)

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...