Wow. I don't think I've heard more things wrong in a single post in a long time.
"<font color=blue>Ok, when you increase a frontside bus (eg from 100/200 to 133/266), you also overclock the bus speeds on your RAM, PCI, AGP, and I would assume ISA (since you have a KT7a-RAID).</font color=blue>"
That motherboard should have a way to change the dividers so that running at 133FSB isn't in any way out of spec.
"<font color=blue>As for DDR, it gives a good perfomance boost.</font color=blue>"
I'm not sure what your definition of good is, but DDR gives barely any performance improvement. And in fact some DDR systems perform worse than some SDR systems. DDR is much more hype than reality.
"<font color=blue>A 266 Athlon will have a 266 bus speed (effectively), but a P3 has a 133 bus. Obviously, having twice as fast a bus will give you faster performance.</font color=blue>"
This one is wrong on so many levels. I hardly know where to begin. First off, Athlons have a double-pumped 133MHz FSB, not a 266MHz FSB. The whole concept of a 266Mhz FSB is a myth made up by marketting to make the chip sound better than it really is. The Athlons still run on a 133MHz clock. As such, they have NO performance gain in this regard over an Intel chip. Yes, Athlons perform better, but that is mostly because of their better FPU and has <i>nothing</i> to do with their FSB.
"<font color=blue>what's the point of raising the FSB and lowering the multiplier to end up where you'd be if you bought the 1.2/266?</font color=blue>"
There really isn't much point for uppercuts. The idea though is that AthlonBs are able to perform as AthlonCs if you overclock the FSB and underclock the multiplier to give you the same GHz rating, but now with a better FSB. Sometimes you can pick up the Bs for cheaper than the Cs, and in those cases, it makes perfect sense to do this.
If the opposite of pro is con, what is the opposite of productivity? Ground first.