the debate was on your statment that all amd cpu's are not fsb limited, and the only thing holding you back is either the board or the memory. I disagree and say each cpu has an inate limit to how high a fsb can be reached, regardless of the total frequency achieved. This was the direct quote:
Shimmishim:
"so the comment about cpu's having an inate limit is incorrect...a cpu can go as high as the board and ram will allow...there are people capable of running a fsb of 250 mhz now tell me THAT'S an inate limit..."
I maintain that not all cpu's have an ability to hit high fsb's. I may have a cpu that can hit 2ghz at 133x15, but not 166x12 (lets just assume they both equal the EXACT smae frequency, even though there is a slight difference in this example). It really is a matter of what batch and how lucky you are, even if your ram and memory are capable of it. I personally have run into this, as well as reading 100's of posts on the subject in various forums. If every Barton could hit 200fsb, AMD would have sold them as such a long time ago, instead of having to refine their manufacturing process to produce chips that could run at that fsb. Now I know alot of people can run at 200+ fsb, but I know there's no guarantee. I would send you my barton myself Shim and show you no matter what hardware, it won't go above 180ish stable (but I won't ). Again, this is just a friendly debate, and there are no hard feelings, so please give your honest answers, but lets keep it clean