VIA KT400 Chipset Overclocking

jmke · 24th December 2002, 15:43

Quote:

In the search for more performance, I tested 3 brandnew KT400 equipped motherboards, in the hope to outperform my current AMD performance system, based on the KT333 chipset.

http://www.madshrimps.be/gotoartik.php?articID=39

Bosw8er · 24th December 2002, 15:52

Nice work !

Should rename it:
"VIA KT400 Chipset si teh suXor ! "

What about hyperion (http://www.viaarena.com/?PageID=211) ?
What's the influence on the benchies ?

jmke · 24th December 2002, 16:02

would be cool if:
a) I had the motherboards & other hardware still in my possesion
b) the R9700Pro worked on the KT400

:-)

24th December 2002, 16:41

why didN'T you put a nforceII in the review?

so that we good see how mutch the kt400 sucks

silencer

RichBa5tard · 24th December 2002, 16:51

Hmmm... not a bad idea silencer.

JMKe, shall I make a quick run of DCDDR running at 133/166/200FSB? It would make a nice comparison.

Awesome work by the way. How did you make those 1337 graphs?

jmke · 24th December 2002, 17:00

you're kidding right.. about the graphs?

Excell man.. please.. go out and buy it, there's a students pack out that includes alot of otherwise very $$$ stuff, for only 100€ or so

yes please & add them to the mentioned thread

anywayz to answer to Silencer's question: I didn't add the nForce2 cause at the time of testing the nForce2 wasn't out yet

but Comtech has shown interest in this, so I might be reviewing 2-3 nForce2 mobo's very soon
Epox & Asus are pretty sure, maybe the Abit will follow also

24th December 2002, 17:12

thx for the answer and correction of my English.

btw nice review

silencer

RichBa5tard · 24th December 2002, 17:17

Here are some epox 8rda+ benches at 7-2-2 CL2:

@133fsb 2075/1997
@166fsb 2582/2468
@200fsb 3104/2920

I don't think sisoft is a good way to bench an nforce mobo though. It cearly states to use 64bit data packets to bench, which is the bandwith of single channel ddr... i wouldn't be suprised if i would get exactly the same results with just 1 stick.

And yes i'll stop being a cheap arse and start spending money on software. :^)

jmke · 24th December 2002, 17:25

those numbers indeed suck compared to the KR7A @ 200

I know sisoft is not the way to bench/compare motherboards
but reallife gaming software benches weren't possible due to the fact that the R9700Pro failed to work

otherwise I had included:
PCMark2002
3DMark2K1
QuakeIII
Serious Sam
UT2003

I had these done on the KT3, as this was the first motherboard I installed, but.. well.. you know.. a TNT2 doesn't really make it an even challenge

RichBa5tard · 24th December 2002, 17:30

They don't 'suck', but it just doesn't reflect the performance gain you get from dcddr in real life apps.

By the way, this epox nforce² at 200FSB is still faster than my ol' KR7A at 205FSB. 3104/2920 <> 3055/2730

24th December 2002, 15:52	#2
Bosw8er Member Join Date: May 2002 Posts: 3,711	Nice work ! Should rename it: "VIA KT400 Chipset si teh suXor ! " What about hyperion (http://www.viaarena.com/?PageID=211) ? What's the influence on the benchies ? __________________ "Think of how stupid the average person is, and realize half of them are stupider than that."

24th December 2002, 16:02	#3
jmke Madshrimp Join Date: May 2002 Location: 7090/Belgium Posts: 79,022	would be cool if: a) I had the motherboards & other hardware still in my possesion b) the R9700Pro worked on the KT400 :-) __________________

24th December 2002, 16:51	#5
RichBa5tard [M] Reviewer/HWBot ***** Join Date: May 2002 Posts: 3,344	Hmmm... not a bad idea silencer. JMKe, shall I make a quick run of DCDDR running at 133/166/200FSB? It would make a nice comparison. Awesome work by the way. How did you make those 1337 graphs? __________________ HTPC (mac osx): Mac Mini \| Core Duo 1.6Ghz \| 2GB DDR2 \| 26\" TFT Development (mac osx): Macbook \| Core 2 2.0Ghz \| 4GB DDR2 \| 250GB HD Games (win xp): E2160 @ 2.4Ghz \| HD3850 OC \| Asrock 4coredual-vsta \| 2GB DDR2

24th December 2002, 17:00	#6
jmke Madshrimp Join Date: May 2002 Location: 7090/Belgium Posts: 79,022	you're kidding right.. about the graphs? Excell man.. please.. go out and buy it, there's a students pack out that includes alot of otherwise very $$$ stuff, for only 100€ or so yes please & add them to the mentioned thread anywayz to answer to Silencer's question: I didn't add the nForce2 cause at the time of testing the nForce2 wasn't out yet but Comtech has shown interest in this, so I might be reviewing 2-3 nForce2 mobo's very soon Epox & Asus are pretty sure, maybe the Abit will follow also __________________

24th December 2002, 17:17	#8
RichBa5tard [M] Reviewer/HWBot ***** Join Date: May 2002 Posts: 3,344	Here are some epox 8rda+ benches at 7-2-2 CL2: @133fsb 2075/1997 @166fsb 2582/2468 @200fsb 3104/2920 I don't think sisoft is a good way to bench an nforce mobo though. It cearly states to use 64bit data packets to bench, which is the bandwith of single channel ddr... i wouldn't be suprised if i would get exactly the same results with just 1 stick. And yes i'll stop being a cheap arse and start spending money on software. :^) __________________ HTPC (mac osx): Mac Mini \| Core Duo 1.6Ghz \| 2GB DDR2 \| 26\" TFT Development (mac osx): Macbook \| Core 2 2.0Ghz \| 4GB DDR2 \| 250GB HD Games (win xp): E2160 @ 2.4Ghz \| HD3850 OC \| Asrock 4coredual-vsta \| 2GB DDR2

24th December 2002, 16:41	#4
silencer Posts: n/a	why didN'T you put a nforceII in the review? so that we good see how mutch the kt400 sucks silencer

24th December 2002, 17:12	#7
silencer Posts: n/a	thx for the answer and correction of my English. btw nice review silencer

24th December 2002, 17:25	#9
jmke Madshrimp Join Date: May 2002 Location: 7090/Belgium Posts: 79,022	those numbers indeed suck compared to the KR7A @ 200 I know sisoft is not the way to bench/compare motherboards but reallife gaming software benches weren't possible due to the fact that the R9700Pro failed to work otherwise I had included: PCMark2002 3DMark2K1 QuakeIII Serious Sam UT2003 I had these done on the KT3, as this was the first motherboard I installed, but.. well.. you know.. a TNT2 doesn't really make it an even challenge __________________

24th December 2002, 17:30	#10
RichBa5tard [M] Reviewer/HWBot ***** Join Date: May 2002 Posts: 3,344	They don't 'suck', but it just doesn't reflect the performance gain you get from dcddr in real life apps. By the way, this epox nforce² at 200FSB is still faster than my ol' KR7A at 205FSB. 3104/2920 <> 3055/2730 __________________ HTPC (mac osx): Mac Mini \| Core Duo 1.6Ghz \| 2GB DDR2 \| 26\" TFT Development (mac osx): Macbook \| Core 2 2.0Ghz \| 4GB DDR2 \| 250GB HD Games (win xp): E2160 @ 2.4Ghz \| HD3850 OC \| Asrock 4coredual-vsta \| 2GB DDR2

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
AMD launches energy efficient 760G chipset	jmke	WebNews	0	19th January 2009 14:06
45 nm Quad Core overclocking, whats the best chipset?	duki	Hardware Overclocking and Case Modding	7	18th August 2008 20:36
Asus AMD overclocking motherboard M3A79-T Deluxe released	jmke	WebNews	0	29th July 2008 17:13
MSI Overclocking Contest : Info & Howto Join	jmke	Hardware Overclocking and Case Modding	1	14th June 2008 20:44
Which chipset for quad-core overclocking?	Sidney	WebNews	0	28th October 2007 18:13
VIA Announces K8N800A Chipset , Notebooks powered by AMD TurionT 64-M	jmke	WebNews	0	25th February 2005 08:44
VIA Announces K8T890, World’s First PCI Express Chipset for the AMD Athlon™ Processor	jmke	WebNews	0	25th September 2004 14:17
Albatron Says Its Mainboards Have Increased Overclocking Potential	jmke	WebNews	1	17th July 2004 02:16
Alienware Selects VIA K8T800 Chipset for Flagship AMD Processor Based Aurora High-Per	jmke	WebNews	0	13th January 2004 15:11
nForce2 Mobo's as bad @ overclocking as the KT400 ?	jmke	General Madness - System Building Advice	2	30th November 2002 15:08