Hope this interests some here:
BTW, the article is in German and the blurp is translated by Google.
Original article:
http://www.3dcenter.org/artikel/2002/03-19_a.php
Google translated:
http://translate.google.com/transla...php&langpair=de|en&hl=en&prev=/language_tools
Source:
http://www.accelenation.com/
I've just skimmed through the article and it tells you the "safe" FSBs vs PCI and AGP speeds; I think.
Hope I didn't get that wrong as I'm on flu medication.. {g}
ALi's MAGiK1 chip set for AMD processors belonged also in the current C1-Stepping to the fast representatives of its guild and does not have therefore also never the large break-through against VIA's chip-corrodes created. Among its users is it however nevertheless because of two special characteristics much likes: On the one hand it is because of its 6 INT lines a very stable solution (Via Chipsaetze: 4 = much means IRQ sharing, Intel Chipsaetze = 8) and on the other hand supports it substantially higher Pci and AGP divisors , than for 133 MHz FrontSideBus of the current AMD processors actually necessary. A exzellentes example for this is the Iwill XP333 Main board, whatever offers this functionality to the user.
The higher Agp and PCI divisor existing on this Main board are naturally outstanding for the FSB Overclocking suitable, lower them nevertheless thereby the developing to high Agp and PCI clock rates again on a compatible measure or even the default values down. However is not this existing function so far so correctly was used - it makes also little sense to want on a anyway only moderately fast Main board by FSB Overclocking the last reserves herauskitzeln.
More interesting these possibilities would be natural on the current Via Chipsaetzen for AMD processors. Unfortunately it is silent itself VIA in his documents over it out which Agp and PCI divisor of the VIA still support KT266(A) chip set beside for the enterprise with 100 and 133 MHz FSB the necessary and/or whether it supports at all still further. Relative for Overclocking functions usable feature gives itself most chip sentence manufacturers anyway in the usual very covered - probably, in order not to spoil itself it directly with the CPU manufacturers, whose license is finally needed for the building by chip corroding.
BTW, the article is in German and the blurp is translated by Google.
Original article:
http://www.3dcenter.org/artikel/2002/03-19_a.php
Google translated:
http://translate.google.com/transla...php&langpair=de|en&hl=en&prev=/language_tools
Source:
http://www.accelenation.com/
I've just skimmed through the article and it tells you the "safe" FSBs vs PCI and AGP speeds; I think.
Hope I didn't get that wrong as I'm on flu medication.. {g}