Query with my Overclock

  • Thread starter Thread starter Kyo
  • Start date Start date

Kyo

Kyo

Kyo

Soldato
Joined
11 Oct 2003
Posts
9,225
Hi

Happy New Year everyone!!

Just wanted to check something with you. :D

I am thinking to overclock my rig. Yes yes it only taken me 2 years+ but i will put my hand up and admit it is sheer laziness and probably because the rig been running fine that i have left everything to default. I have done quite a bit of reading and research for while but have been meaning to try this for a ages so slow as i am i think i will give this a bash :D *me ducks James Miller's slap*

One query is that if i had a choice i obviously want out of these 2 options the former rather than later ie 1

Option 1 - my CPU to my desired overclock speed and my memory running on 1:1 basis on the divider than

Option 2 - Running my CPU to my desired speed but having to go through a lowered memory divider to lower memory speed to achieve stability etc etc.

Cheers

Kyo
 
Run your CPU as fast as you can. 939 systems don't take a hit from running the memory on a divider. You just tighten the timings as far as you can on the highest divider you can run.
 
Hmm running SP2004 and it giving me errors :( although the pc is running fine in apps and games etc.

Type: Large, in-place FFTs - stress some RAM Min: 128 Max: 1024 InPlace: Yes Mem: 8 Time: 15
CPU: 2750MHz FSB: 194MHz [196MHz x 14.0 est.]
01/01/2008 20:28 Beginning a continuous self-test to check your computer.
Press Stop to end this test.
Test 1, 4000 Lucas-Lehmer iterations of M19922945 using 1024K FFT length.
FATAL ERROR: Rounding was 0.4999989122, expected less than 0.4
Hardware failure detected, consult stress.txt file.
Torture Test ran 0 minutes 2 seconds - 1 errors, 0 warnings.
Execution halted.

Where is this stress.txt ??
 
Have you dropped the HT multiplier to x4? I assume you're running 250 x 11?
 
Cob said:
Have you dropped the HT multiplier to x4? I assume you're running 250 x 11?
Click to expand...

Yes i am running x4 LDT/FSB ratio. Switched it back to running CPU 2.6Ghz stable and without any errors. Didn't like fatal hardware error? I don't seem to be able to find this stress.txt?
 
Probably just needs a bit more vcore.

Tho I've no first-hand experience of the DFI 939 boards or their known quirks.
 
I got it stable and you were spot on need a bit more voltage on cpu as i had it on default (1.4 vcore). The only slight concern is that the cpu temp on full load hits around 60. I know my absolute limit is 70 ony my type of opty so should i be concerned.?

One thing i fail to mention before was that i was using SP2004 and i was using the Large FFT test. Is that a accurate or rather good test to rely upon? Reading somewhere it was mention it wasn't a good test or rather it could be misleading??


EDIT- Just lowered my vcore down a little and it running stable. Jumping from 1.4 to 1.5 in the 1st instance made the whole thing stable but like i mentioned temp was a little concerning so i change it half way now 1.45 approx and it stable :) Full load is hitting 55 tops. That's ok?
 
Last edited:
Yeah 55c is fine.

The Blend test would be better for testing the CPU and memory. Or use the Small FFT test for just the CPU.
 
Running tests and playing games, using applications all seems well. 30 on idle and 50+ for load. The wind tunnel on my case helps as it sits over the socket slot :)

Ta very much for your help Cob. hehe i never knew it could be so easy. Thought i would have to pay someone to do it but thought to give it a go myself. Glad i did now. :D

Just hope i don't have to relearn the concepts if i move to a intel conroe duel/quad core and overlock it in the future
 
You're more than welcome to donate to my Paypal fund it you want ;)


The Opty's were always really easy to clock. Everybody loved them. My 146 did 2.9 on a little more than stock volts.
 
On a finishing note i noticed your on the conroe system. Is it totally different to overclock intels from the amd's? Might do some more reading cause if i upgraded i reckon i would go for it like most :D Anywhere i can read up ?

Cheers again :)
 
They're pretty much the same. The only major difference is that the recent Intel chipsets can't run the memory lower than 1:1 (tho the nvidia chipsets can). But DDR2 is able to keep up.
 
right running 3dmark06 and it hitting just over 5k. I think compared to averages that below average is that considered pretty poor? Gfx i just left on default :D
 
It's not great tbh. I get ~7500 with my X1900XT-X just auto-clocked through the ATI CCC.

Now I realise that I've got an overclocked quad, but I don't think it's worth 50% more points.

Tho I'm no expert on 3DMark.
 
Last edited:
Do you think i could do better if i configured my memory a bit better? or should i be getting well over 5k easy?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom