I was curious. Why won't AMD implement a 166mhz FSB? Is there anything different electrically or in the logic that would prevent such a move?
From what I've seen, upping the FSB would just mean lowering the multiplier and running the CPU at the same speed. aka run a 1333mhz chip at 166x8 instead of 133x10.
We have a ready supply of PC2700 DDR, so it would seem logical to me that AMD could release at least some chips that use 166mhz FSB. Instead, I'm reading comments on how AMD pulled pretty much every engineer it has to work on hammer, leaving almost no one working on developing Thoroughbred and Barton, resulting in lots of features getting pulled including increasing the FSB and SOI.
From what I've seen, upping the FSB would just mean lowering the multiplier and running the CPU at the same speed. aka run a 1333mhz chip at 166x8 instead of 133x10.
We have a ready supply of PC2700 DDR, so it would seem logical to me that AMD could release at least some chips that use 166mhz FSB. Instead, I'm reading comments on how AMD pulled pretty much every engineer it has to work on hammer, leaving almost no one working on developing Thoroughbred and Barton, resulting in lots of features getting pulled including increasing the FSB and SOI.