AMD CPU's and Win2k
This is a discussion about AMD CPU's and Win2k in the Windows Hardware category; Everytime I check the CPU speed in any program, including MS System Info, they report it to be running at 266 or 226 mhz instead of what it really is running at, 450 mhz. Could this possibly be affecting the performance of the system or any of the applications I may run? Or is it just some screw up the MS geeks did ...
Everytime I check the CPU speed in any program, including MS System Info, they report it to be running at 266 or 226 mhz instead of what it really is running at, 450 mhz. Could this possibly be affecting the performance of the system or any of the applications I may run? Or is it just some screw up the MS geeks didn't bother fixing before releasing?
Participate in our website and join the conversation
This subject has been archived. New comments and votes cannot be submitted.
Feb 28
Mar 13
0
6 minutes
Responses to this topic
Which AMd chip are you talking about? k6-2 or 3? Are you running the final verison of win2k?
I've got an k6-2 450 running at 500 and it comes up correct at 500. but, i think i remember seeing someone with a similar problem to yours, somewhere. i have no idea where i saw this and it might have even been in win98! but, have a search through the message board anyway, you never know your luck.
Do, games and apps think its an 450? (if they didn't they would be running very slowly compared to when you used win98.)
I've got an k6-2 450 running at 500 and it comes up correct at 500. but, i think i remember seeing someone with a similar problem to yours, somewhere. i have no idea where i saw this and it might have even been in win98! but, have a search through the message board anyway, you never know your luck.
Do, games and apps think its an 450? (if they didn't they would be running very slowly compared to when you used win98.)
OP
My CPU is a K6-2 450 , jumpered and running at 450 in 98 and from what the CMOS says. Everything in Win2k "sees" the CPU as the lower speed of 226 or 266 or in that area.
I am running Win2k Pro final, with other than the CPU you already know about, 192 megs RAM, 27 gigs HDD, and an 8 meg vid card and other misc hardware
I am running Win2k Pro final, with other than the CPU you already know about, 192 megs RAM, 27 gigs HDD, and an 8 meg vid card and other misc hardware
Bka32 what mobo u got?
------------------
***TRUST YOUR TECHNOLUST***
------------------
***TRUST YOUR TECHNOLUST***
I had exactly the same problem as you (It was my post that Reaper_uk saw)
I've got an AMD K6-2 500, everything was reporting it to be a 251Mhz - I'd pretty much given up hope of fixing it, Something I did made me have to reformat my hard disk and reinstall, after the installation everything reported the processor at it's correct speed of 500Mhz
I can only put the original problems down to a bad installation, so my advice is Backup - Reformat - ReInstall
Hope that helps - let me know how you get on
P.S. I may be imagining it, but I'm sure there has been a performance increase since I reinstalled...
I've got an AMD K6-2 500, everything was reporting it to be a 251Mhz - I'd pretty much given up hope of fixing it, Something I did made me have to reformat my hard disk and reinstall, after the installation everything reported the processor at it's correct speed of 500Mhz
I can only put the original problems down to a bad installation, so my advice is Backup - Reformat - ReInstall
Hope that helps - let me know how you get on
P.S. I may be imagining it, but I'm sure there has been a performance increase since I reinstalled...
i would agree with sweevo about the format. just make sure you backup all your important stuff. if you have win2k and win98 on the same partition at the moment, maybe try putting win2k on a different partition.
OP
As far as having the two on the same partition, are you nuts? They're seperate 
But I've already reinstalled and it still does no good. I have a Gigabyte GA-5AX mainboard
But I've already reinstalled and it still does no good. I have a Gigabyte GA-5AX mainboard
The only thing I'd changed was that I'd Flashed my BIOS to the latest revision, and reset the BIOS to it's defaults - it may sound like an obvious thing to do, but if you haven't done it, then try it.
I'd probably reinstall 3 times (for varying reasons) before the install the gave me the correct speed - and the installation disk I used was a "new" one (shrink wrapped copy).
If you do a search for my previous post, you'll find that I quoted a Microsoft Knowledge base artical which talks about the problem (well sort of anyway) - I contacted my M/Board manufacturer (MSI) and they confirmed that there was no problem, so it really looks like it could be a configuration problem on your machine - and most likely it's the BIOS... but I could be wrong...
I'd probably reinstall 3 times (for varying reasons) before the install the gave me the correct speed - and the installation disk I used was a "new" one (shrink wrapped copy).
If you do a search for my previous post, you'll find that I quoted a Microsoft Knowledge base artical which talks about the problem (well sort of anyway) - I contacted my M/Board manufacturer (MSI) and they confirmed that there was no problem, so it really looks like it could be a configuration problem on your machine - and most likely it's the BIOS... but I could be wrong...
OP
The BIOS is flashed to its latest version provided by the manufacturer, and I've reinstalled so many times I've lost count. It really doesn't matter so long as I know the machine is working at its fastest speed and nothing is slowed because the OS "thinks" its slower.
I just upgraded my processor from a K6-2 350 to a 500, and now i have this problem it always says processor speed is 251mhz, i have reinstalled many times and that never changes. Has anyone had any luck finding a solution to this? It is causing me a few problems and i installed one game which says i have a 90mhz processor when the game starts it just goes stupidly fast
I have a K6-2 500 with an Epox motherboard. No problems. Actually, I have increased the FSB to 112, with a 4.5X and Win 2000 reports it as a 504. MS also released a KB article about the AMD K6-2 450 CPU with Win98SE. The article mentions that the DXdiag tool will report the CPU as 266 or something like that. Maybe, this same problem is in Win2000. I never had any of these problems with either OS. I would suspect that your motherboard is not correctly supported, and therefore passing the wrong info though the OS calls. I would check with your supplier for new drivers, MAYBE ??
Guys, this sound ****ed up! I have a K6-2 @ 450 (4.5 x 100, clean!) and it reports as:
"AMDK63D Processor, MMX, 3DNow, 450MHz" in DXDIAG.However I have W98 (no SE)...i had no problems like this in W2K Pro either...
The NT (and W2K) component that recognizes your CPU is called HAL, maybe this file is damaged, otherwise it won't report crap like that. Somehow it looks like you didn't have a smooth upgrade....
"AMDK63D Processor, MMX, 3DNow, 450MHz" in DXDIAG.However I have W98 (no SE)...i had no problems like this in W2K Pro either...
The NT (and W2K) component that recognizes your CPU is called HAL, maybe this file is damaged, otherwise it won't report crap like that. Somehow it looks like you didn't have a smooth upgrade....
I think i have figured out the problem it seems maybe its a bug with ACPI, i tested a few diffrent settings and when installed as acpi computer with 500 and 350 processor the clock speed is always reported as half actual speed, i tried installing as standard pc and it gives correct clock speed all the time, are you running as standard or ACPI?
Changing to Standard has fixed all the problems i had although it means standby mode is no longer available
i would like a fix for ACPI support
anyone know a way, is it my motherboard or a problem with windows?
Changing to Standard has fixed all the problems i had although it means standby mode is no longer available
i would like a fix for ACPI support
anyone know a way, is it my motherboard or a problem with windows?
OP
If disabling ACPI support is what it takes, then that means it's an OS problem, because all drivers are from M$ at the time.
