|
|
 |
|
|
Pages: 1
Processor trouble
(Click here to view the original thread with full colors/images)
Posted by: equazcion
I built my system a while ago, and I had ordered an AMD Athlon XP 2600+ and an Asus A7V600-X motherboard. Now that I've decided to try experimenting with overclocking, I got myself a bunch of diagnostic utilities. All of them seem to be telling me that the internal "name string" for my CPU reads "Athlon XP 1700+", when I had ordered a 2600+. The chip IS running at 2200 MHz, which to my understanding is expected for an Athlon XP 2600+. But still, that name string is bothering me. Did I perhaps recieve a 1700+ in error, and inadvertently overclock it up to what a 2600+ would be? My CPU temperature hold steady between 40 - 45 degrees Celcius, which leads me to think that I'm not overclocking, since the temp would be higher if I was. Then again, I have a heavy-duty Thermaltake CPU fan running at 5,000 RPM. I just don't know. I'm hoping the internal name string for the CPU is just wrong.
Here's all the info I have, from WCPUID. Can anyone tell me if I have a true Athlon XP 2600+? I really appreciate any clue anyone out there can supply.
[ WCPUID Version 3.3 (c) 1996-2004 By H.Oda! ]
Processor #1 : AMD Athlon XP (Model A) / 77694DD8
Platform : Socket A (Socket 462)
Vendor String : AuthenticAMD
CPU Type : Original OEM Processor (0)
Family : 6 (7)
Model : 10 (10)
Stepping ID : 0 (0)
Brand ID : - (-)
APIC : ----
HT Log.CPU Cnt : ----
Name String : AMD Athlon(TM) XP 1700+
Internal Clock : 2201.34 MHz
System Bus : 400.24 MHz DDR
System Clock : 200.12 MHz
Multiplier : 11.0
L1 I-Cache : 64K Byte
L1 D-Cache : 64K Byte
L1 T-Cache : ----
L1 Cache : ----
L2 Cache : 128K Byte
L2 Speed : 2201.34 MHz (Full)
MMX Unit : Supported
SSE Unit : Supported
SSE2 Unit : Not Supported
SSE3 Unit : Not Supported
MMX2 Unit : Supported
3DNow! Unit : Supported
3DNow!+ Unit : Supported
Host Bridge : 1106:3189.80 [VIA Apollo KT400/A]
South Bridge : 1106:3227.00 [VIA VT8237]
VGA Device : 10DE:0111.B2 [NVIDIA GeForce2 MX 100/200]
Memory Size : 512M Byte
Memory Clock : ----
Posted by: redwench
im not going to look it up, but theyre probably the same processor. they usually make large batches of a processor, then test them. whatever they test stable for, is what they are sold for. i wouldnt be too surprised if the 1700 and 2600 are the same chip. or the diagnostic software youre using is an older version.
Posted by: equazcion
I made sure the diagnostic software was updated. I also used other utilities and got the same data. I would accept your answer except that the string being read is the internal processor name string - it's not like the software is doing a speed test and telling me which processor it think it must be. This is an internal, static tag that AMD has set, and it's saying Athlon XP 1700+. I even used AMD's own utility to read the tag, and it says the same thing (in AMD's utility you can even see the code that it's reading from the chip and translating into the chip name and model).
Posted by: redwench
i know what theyre reading, if the programs were doing speed tests, they wouldnt come up with a 1700, they would name it a 2600. its quite possible the internal code is a 1700, if the 2600 and 1700 are in fact the same. i presume that they are, as your cpu is running properly at the 2600 settings. you couldnt possibly overclock that much without a meltdown.
in other words, ignore it.
Posted by: Ion Silverbolt
133x11=1463Mhz
200x11=2200Mhz
The processor origanally was probably designed for 133FSB operation. Which would show up as a 1700+. Since you're running at 2200Mhz, it's obviously running properly even though it's detected wrong.
It is possible it's an illegally remarked processor, but I highly doubt that's the problem unless you purchased the CPU from a Eurpopean or Asian vendor.
Posted by: Superfly3176
Try using CPU-Z found right here and see what it reads. http://www.cpuid.com/
If it still says 1700+ i believe you got ripped off and did get an illegally marked processor.
Edit: Nevermind you do have cpuid, that is usually very reliable did you try aida32?
|
|
|
|
|
