1. This forum section is a read-only archive which contains old newsgroup posts. If you wish to post a query, please do so in one of our main forum sections (here). This way you will get a faster, better response from the members on Motherboard Point.

Windows reports Wrong CPU Speed.

Discussion in 'AMD Overclocking' started by Mutley, Sep 16, 2004.

  1. Mutley

    Mutley Guest

    I have a AMD Pro 3100A+ Processor running on a PC Chips M825G MainBoard.
    ( http://tinyurl.com/47fus ) with 1GB of DDR.

    Windows reports it as a AMD Athlon XP 2000+
    Does anyone know why?

    BTW, its running at 1.67GHz and its not clocked.
     
    Mutley, Sep 16, 2004
    #1
    1. Advertisements

  2. Mutley

    kony Guest


    A "Pro 3100A+" is a nonsense made-up name to deceive buyers.
    There is no such CPU in reality, so it's to be expected that
    Windows wouldn't call it that.

    At 1.67 GHz, (assuming it's not a Duron, IIRC they switched
    to Athlons after a certain "Pro" speed) it is essentially an
    XP2000.
     
    kony, Sep 16, 2004
    #2
    1. Advertisements

  3. There is no such thing.
    Because that's what it is.
     
    Never anonymous Bud, Sep 16, 2004
    #3
  4. Mutley

    Mutley Guest

    Thu, 16 Sep 2004 19:58:28 +0100 spoke:
    CPUID Output
    ----------------------------------------------------------------------------
    --
    Number of CPUs 1
    Name AMD Athlon XP
    Code name Thoroughbred
    Specification AMD Athlon(tm) XP 2000+
    Family/Model/Stepping 681
    Extended Family/Model 7/8
    Package Socket A
    Core Stepping B0
    Technology 0.13µ
    Instructions Sets MMX, Extended MMX, 3DNow!, Extended 3DNow!, SSE
    Clock Speed 1666.8 MHz
    Clock multiplier x12.5
    Front Side Bus Frequency 133.3 MHz
    Bus Speed 266.7 MHz
    L1 Data Cache 64 KBytes, 2-way set associative, 64 Bytes line size
    L1 Instruction Cache 64 KBytes, 2-way set associative, 64 Bytes line size
    L2 Cache 256 KBytes, 16-way set associative, 64 Bytes line size
    L2 Speed 1666.8 MHz (Full)
    L2 Location On Chip
    L2 Data Prefetch Logic yes
    L2 Bus Width 64 bits.
     
    Mutley, Sep 16, 2004
    #4
  5. Mutley

    ~misfit~ Guest

    Number of CPUs 1
    Name AMD Athlon XP
    Code name Thoroughbred
    Specification AMD Athlon(tm) XP 2000+
    Family/Model/Stepping 681
    Extended Family/Model 7/8
    Package Socket A
    Core Stepping B0
    Technology 0.13µ
    Instructions Sets MMX, Extended MMX, 3DNow!, Extended 3DNow!, SSE
    Clock Speed 1666.8 MHz
    Clock multiplier x12.5
    Front Side Bus Frequency 133.3 MHz
    Bus Speed 266.7 MHz
    L1 Data Cache 64 KBytes, 2-way set associative, 64 Bytes line size
    L1 Instruction Cache 64 KBytes, 2-way set associative, 64 Bytes line size
    L2 Cache 256 KBytes, 16-way set associative, 64 Bytes line size
    L2 Speed 1666.8 MHz (Full)
    L2 Location On Chip
    L2 Data Prefetch Logic yes
    L2 Bus Width 64 bits.

    So there you have it, you have an Athlon XP2200+. (I'm suprised that CPUID
    doesn't say "Thoroughbred B" though) The whole "AMD Pro 3100A+" is a
    bullshit marketing scam that certain company's in the USA are pulling. I for
    one don't know how they get away with it. AMD certainly didn't ever make a
    CPU called a "AMD Pro 3100A+". I read somewhere that it's what speed a
    Pentium 1 would have to run at to be on par with it. Hardly a valid
    comparison these days considering a P1 didn't have on-die L2 cache or half
    the instuction-sets that modern CPUs have.

    You, my friend, have been had. Unless it was cheap enough and you are happy
    with the performance.
     
    ~misfit~, Sep 17, 2004
    #5
  6. Yeah? And why does everyone just automatically assume it's "certain
    companies in the USA"? Looks to me like this is a PCChips 'exclusive' in a
    long like of 'Pro' exclusives, like their "BX Pro" (also BXcel and BXToo
    and BXPert) that wasn't a BX chipset and the "TX Pro" and "TX Pro II" that
    weren't TX chipsets, not to mention the infamous "PC100 Pro" that didn't
    support a 100Mhz FSB. "Pro" seems to be the PCChips code word for "we're
    lying."

    Just for the record, PCChips is not a 'U.S. company'.

    http://www.7bytes.com/sys1s.cgi?035+BBAM102

    Those people may be selling it but they warn you about it too.

    Because it's 'their name' for whatever it is, or so they might argue. Just
    as AMD calls a 1.67GHz processor an "XP 2000+." How do THEY 'get away with it'?

    Speaking of it isn't what it says it is, maybe Dan Rather and CBS should
    try calling them the "National Guard 'Pro'" documents.
     
    David Maynard, Sep 17, 2004
    #6
  7. Mutley

    ECM Guest

    1.67GHz is correct for a Athlon XP 2000+. I'm not sure what Athlon you're
    running; is it a AthlonXP 3000+ with a 333MHz FSB? If so, it'll run at
    2.16GHz; if it's anAthlonXP 3000+ 400MHz FSB it'll run at 2.2GHz. I suspect
    you've got the AthlonXP 3000+, 333FSB set at a FSB of 133MHz. It's the only
    thing that makes sense.

    So, get into the BIOS, and set the FSB at 177 (that's what a 333FSB actually
    runs at; it's multiplied by 2).

    Good Luck!
    ECM
     
    ECM, Sep 17, 2004
    #7
  8. Mutley

    ECM Guest

    Now that I've seen the posts from misfit and Mutley, I think could be
    wrong - I vaguely remeber hearing something about thisidiotic scam. What a
    sh!tty deal! Get your money back if you can!
     
    ECM, Sep 17, 2004
    #8
  9. Mutley

    Tony Hill Guest

    Because that's what it is. The store that sold it to you (Tiger
    Direct?) was using VERY sketchy marketing practices to say the least.
    There is no such thing as an "AMD Pro 3100A+" processor, all this
    store is doing is taking an AthlonXP 2000+ processor and slapping a
    new sticker on it and selling it as something else.

    In most markets this is illegal, an a call to the better business
    bureau is not an entirely bad idea. However your best bet would be to
    return it to the store and demand your money back.
    That is the correct speed for this AthlonXP 2000+ processor you were
    sold.

    PS. PC Chips has a LONG history of defrauding customers. They are
    known crooks, but consumer protection laws are weak to say the least,
    especially when the company screwing people over is based out of
    China.
     
    Tony Hill, Sep 17, 2004
    #9
  10. Mutley

    Wes Newell Guest

    So it's a Tbred B core 2000+ XP. But you didn't get burned as bad as they
    thought they burned you. Being a B core (noted by the 681 CPUID code) will
    let you clock this cpu to a much higher speed. Just set the FSB to 166MHz
    (assuming you know how to do this) and you end up with a 2600+. Consider
    yourself lucky. Others hafve been burned with Pro 2800A systems that were
    Durons.:)
     
    Wes Newell, Sep 17, 2004
    #10
  11. Mutley

    CBFalconer Guest

    When I was in the second grade I was taught that 177 * 2 was very
    close to 354 :) You have a naughty keyboard.
     
    CBFalconer, Sep 17, 2004
    #11
  12. Mutley

    CBFalconer Guest

    If it performs the equivalent of the 'Industry Leader's chip at
    the designated clock speed, what is wrong with the reduced
    dissipation and extra timing margins of using a slower clock
    rate? Unfortunately these marketdroid antics are necessary to
    avoid being rejected out of hand by ignorant buyers.
     
    CBFalconer, Sep 17, 2004
    #12
  13. That was my first thought, but a search on the 'model number'
    turned up a LOT of hits, mostly small shops, selling them.
     
    Never anonymous Bud, Sep 17, 2004
    #13
  14. Mutley

    Mal Guest

    <snip>

    Because it's 'their name' for whatever it is, or so they might argue. Just
    as AMD calls a 1.67GHz processor an "XP 2000+." How do THEY 'get away with
    it'?

    <snip>

    because that's it's performance rating compared to a Pentium 4 ... even
    though it runs at 1.6Ghz it performs like a 2.0Ghz P4 so looking at the name
    you can tell what sort of processing power you're buying.
     
    Mal, Sep 17, 2004
    #14
  15. Yeah? Which P4? Willamette? Northwood? Extreme? Hyperthreading on/off? What
    FSB? (it matters, you know)

    AMD says it's based on a series of benchmarks relative to the original
    Athlon; not 'compared to a P4'.
    One can always come up with an 'explanation' for the invented 'nomenclature'.
     
    David Maynard, Sep 17, 2004
    #15
  16. Mutley

    Franc Zabkar Guest

    That may be so, but AFAIK PC Chips do not sell CPUs. So if anyone is
    defrauding customers in this particular case, it is the vendor of the
    CPU, not PC Chips.


    - Franc Zabkar
     
    Franc Zabkar, Sep 17, 2004
    #16
  17. Yes, they do. AMD Duron, AMD Athlon (PCChips description), and VIA C3
    soldered onto the motherboard.


    http://www.pcchipsusa.com/prod-m789cluv12.asp

    · VIA C3 Samual 2 1500+(800MHz/133) processor onboard at 133MHz FSB


    http://www.pcchipsusa.com/prod-m825gv92c.asp

    On-Board CPU CPU Speed FSB
    AMD Athlon™/PRO 2700A+ 1333MHz 133 MHz FSB
    AMD Duron™/PRO 2200+ 1200MHz 100 MHz FSB
    AMD Duron™/PRO 2800+ 1600MHz 133 MHz FSB

    http://www.pcchipsusa.com/prod-m825luv72c.asp

    On-Board CPU CPU Speed FSB
    AMD Athlon™/PRO 2100A+ 1100MHz 133 MHz FSB
    AMD Athlon™ /PRO 2700A+ 1333MHz 133 MHz FSB
    AMD Athlon™/PRO 3000A+ 1700MHz 133 MHz FSB
    AMD Athlon™/PRO 3100A+ 2000MHz 133 MHz FSB
    AMD Duron™/PRO 2100+ 1100MHz 100 MHz FSB

    http://www.pcchipsusa.com/prod-m863gv15c.asp

    On-Board CPU CPU Speed FSB
    AMD Athlon™/PRO 3000A+ 1800MHz 133 MHz FSB

    How they arrive at those 'Pro' ratings is a mystery.
    Think again.
     
    David Maynard, Sep 17, 2004
    #17
  18. Mutley

    BigBadger Guest

    That may be so, but AFAIK PC Chips do not sell CPUs. So if anyone is
    So when AMD make a XP2000+ CPU and then PC Chips integrate it in a
    motherboard and sell it as a Pro3100+ your saying this is somehow AMD's
    fault????
     
    BigBadger, Sep 17, 2004
    #18
  19. Oh, come on. I think it's rather obvious he is unaware that PCChips put the
    processor on the board, since he said "AFAIK PC Chips do not sell CPUs,"
    and that he assumed it was the more 'traditional' situation where the mobo
    manufacturer sells the board and someone ELSE, I.E. "the vendor of the
    CPU," places the processor on it.

    He's incorrect but that doesn't mean your 'interpretation' makes any sense.
     
    David Maynard, Sep 17, 2004
    #19
  20. Mutley

    Wes Newell Guest

    And one can always find the facts. Copied form the pdf. I'll let whoever
    wants to read it sort it out, but note the reference to the P4.

    Page 2 AMD Athlon" XP Processor June 4, 2002 Benchmarking and Model
    Numbering Methodology Performance and Frequency With the advent of the AMD
    Athlon" processor and the Intel Pentium® 4 processor, the design
    architectures of these two companies fundamentally diverged. This design
    divergence has resulted in a difference in work done per clock cycle.
    Thus, microprocessors operating at identical frequencies may offer
    dramatically different levels of performance. Consequently, frequency is
    no longer the most meaningful metric for judging relative microprocessor
    performance. Today s end users need a better approach W H I T E P A P E R
    for comparing relative processor performance. This new approach must
    recognize that end users: " Care about the performance of the applications
    that they use and care less about the results of synthetic tests "
    Typically use a variety of application software " Care about the
    performance of the system that they purchase " Need the ability to easily
    and simply conduct comparative shopping AMD is driving the True
    Performance Initiative (TPI) a strategic initiative with industry leaders
    and consumer advocates to develop a reliable processor performance metric
    that PC users can trust.

    And then there's the tables that compare it to the P4 and even a list of
    the P4 hardware used in the comparative systems. The only conclusing on
    can come to is that the PR is for comparison to the P4.

    Better throw this in too.

    Competitive Comparison It is also important to consider how AMD Athlon XP
    processors perform relative to competitive PC processors. In order to
    provide an accurate comparison between systems based on the AMD Athlon XP
    processor and on the Pentium 4 processor, systems are configured
    similarly. The details of the system configurations utilized in this
    analysis are listed in Appendix D. For the purposes of this comparison,
    AMD has used DDR memory system configurations for both the AMD and Intel
    processor-based systems. DDR was chosen because it has been adopted as the
    mainstream memory system configuration whereas RDRAM has been relegated to
    high-end systems and is expected to account for less than 10 percent of
    the market, according to industry analysts. Appendix C includes a
    comparison using the RDRAM memory system configuration for the Pentium 4.
     
    Wes Newell, Sep 17, 2004
    #20
    1. Advertisements

Ask a Question

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

You'll need to choose a username for the site, which only take a couple of moments (here). After that, you can post your question and our members will help you out.