Trying to hit 3GHz with a 64 3000

Soldato
Joined
25 Jul 2006
Posts
3,529
Location
Taunton
ok just generally want to know if there are any tips that i could be made aware of, like:

just how much volts i can put through this on air?
how much volts my OCZ DDR PC-3200 Value Series (CAS 2.5) ram can take?
whats the highest known clock for this ram?
best timings that i could/ should aim to achieve?
whats the most volts i can put through my NB on an Epox EP 9NPA + Ultra?
 
For the cpu, volts less than 1.55 and temp less than 55 are considered safe maximums.
Not sure about the ram, but you could always put it on a divider.
 
your ram isnt an issue if you just use a divider and keep it around 200mhz (obviously it will probably OC a little bit)

best timings ram-wise for value kits are hard to judge as companies usually stick many different types of chips in their value range, you may find your memory might do close to 2-2-2, then again it might refuse to budge below 2.5-3-3, so i would download memtest86+, and slowly reduce each timing by one, test it with memtest, if it passes, reduce another setting by one until you get as close to 2-2-2 as possible without it failing

ultra chipset will eat up volts, just watch the heat, you dont want to kill it (maybe +.2v as a limit)

dont forget to lower the HT to 3*

with a bit of luck you should get 2.5ghz, maybe 3ghz
 
Whats your cooler?

Give it some stick, up to 1.7 on vcore, 3v on ram, whatever the mobo will let you on the chipset.

Although i wouldnt run 1.7 all the time, just for suicide runs
 
nah, doing it on air lol :p

Defcon5 said:
Whats your cooler?
Akasa Evo 33, not the best i know. :(

cheers for the advice, i got it running at 2.9GHz but wasnt stable running superpi
atm settings are as follows: (2.8GHz)
HTT - x3
FSB - 311
Multiplier - 9
CPU v - + 0.125 = ~1.62
Ram v - 2.8
NB v - 1.6
Mem freq - 133 = ~208Mhz
Timings - 1T @ 3-3-6-3

i did try 2-2-5-2 but wouldnt boot with the mem freq being 133 it did work at 100 mem frequency.
but just wouldnt boot at all when i tried for 3GHz, would get to before windows loading screen, then restart. any ideas?
settings were as follows:
HTT - x3
FSB - 333
Multiplier - 9
CPU v - + 0.15 = ~1.63
Ram v - 2.8
NB v - 1.6
Mem freq - 100 = ~166Mhz
Timings - 1T @ 3-4-7-4
 
3ghz is were any component now can be the limiting factor
1st idea, your chip cant do 3ghz
2nd idea its overheating
3rd idea, your mobo cant handle 333mhz fsb

another thing to note, with those dividers, you can still run your ram quite tightly and this shouldnt affect your overall OC as its running slower in those cases than its specced to
did you actually use memtest86+ to find the best timings your memory can run @ 200mhz? and it higher speeds such as 220mhz/230mhz?
if not i would try memtest86+ with 2-3-3-6 @ 200mhz as if its tccd/tcc5/bh-6/ch-5/ch-6 it should be able to do it,
then 2.5-3-3-6, it should really do these timings atleast upto 230mhz really, maybe allowing you to use a better divider :)
 
i thought lower timings were better?

mikeymike said:
3ghz is were any component now can be the limiting factor
1st idea, your chip cant do 3ghz
2nd idea its overheating
3rd idea, your mobo cant handle 333mhz fsb

1st idea, agreed possibly it cant.
2nd idea, not really. only just hitting 36oc
3rd idea, possibly but why would mobo go up to 400mhz fsb?
 
yes lower timings are better, im saying your running at 3-3-3, try 2-2-2 if that doesnt work try 2-3-3, if that doesnt work try 2.5-3-3 dont just go 2-2-2, oh it doesnt work ill use 3-3-3
 
my DFI goes up to something like 450mhz officially in actual fact it wont go much beyong 370mhz, not knowing what motherboard you have, i couldn't say what your max FSB would likely be, but just because the option is there, doesnt mean your pc can handle it.
after-all i can also officially set my memory to 400mhz, but there's no chance in hell its ever going to make it that far!
 
ok i did get it to 2.9GHz but it just bout lasted long enough for a pi time of 30.203secs

atm its sat at 2.87GHz and seems stable enough. new timings for ram are 2-3-5-3 @ 216Mhz
 
Pulse said:
ok i did get it to 2.9GHz but it just bout lasted long enough for a pi time of 30.203secs

atm its sat at 2.87GHz and seems stable enough. new timings for ram are 2-3-5-3 @ 216Mhz

Thats excellent.

To see if your mobo can handle the freqs, lower your cpu multi and raise the htt to see how high it will go.

Sometimes its the particular divider you are using, try a different one. Have you flashed the bios?
 
i'd say use 2-3-3-7 not 2-3-3-5 as setting the total latency allowed to 5 cycles = whilst using 2-3-3 means some memory operations will not complete, therefore they will be forced to start again, using 2-3-3-7 will eliminate this, try downloading sandra from sisofts website and run the memory benchmark whilst using 2-3-3-5 then 2-3-3-7, even though you are increasing the total cycle time, your memory score should increase as you wont be cutting off write cycles before they finish
 
this is direct from mushkins website and tells you exactly why i just suggested what i did, and why it will hopefully increase your memory performance by changing the tRAS:


"....What is tRAS and why is it backwards and important at the same time?

The word latencies is generally used to describe a delay. However, Merriam-Webster defines the word’s origin as period of dormancy and in technical parlance, latency is often used to describe simply the duration of any event. One example is the PCI latency which describes the time any device has access to the PCI bus before it will be automatically disconnected to allow other devices access to the same resources. Why are we talking about this? Very simple, the access latencies of any device to the PCI bus are usually eight cycles, but the total latency can be set from 16-256 cycles. This shows that the same word is used to describe two entirely different parameters, the first being the time until any transactions can start, the second referring to the time that is available for transactions (minus the access latencies). As an example, a PCI latency of 32 will carry a penalty (access latency) of 8 cycles which leaves 24 cycles for actual data transfers. Therefore, decreasing this latency will not increase performance, on the contrary. The exact same is true for tRAS short for the RAS Pulse width. Historically, tRAS was defined as the time needed to establish the necessary potential between a bitline pair within the memory array until it was safe to write back the data to the memory cells of origin after a (destructive) read. Pay attention to the word read here. Memory, in many ways is like a book, you can only read after opening a book to a certain page and paragraph within that particular page. The RAS Pulse Width is the time until a page can be closed again. Therefore, just by definition, the minimum tRAS must be the RAS-to-CAS delay plus the read latency (CAS delay). That is fine for FPM and EDO memory with their single word data transfers. With SDRAM, memory controllers started to output a chain of four consecutive quadwords on every access. With DDR, that number has increased to eight quadwords that effectively are two consecutive bursts of four. Now imagine someone closes the book you are reading from in the middle of a sentence. Right in your face! And does it over and again. This is what happens if tRAS is set too short. So here is the really simple calculation: The second burst of four has at least to be initiated and prefetched into the output buffers (like you get a glimpse at the headline in a book) before you can close the page without losing all information. That means that the minimum tRAS would be tRCD+CAS latency + 2 cycles (to output the first burst of four and make way for the second burst in the output buffers). Any tRAS setting lower tRCD + CAS + 2 cycles will allow the memory controller to close the page “in your face!” over and again and that will cause a performance hit because of a truncated transfer that needs to be repeated. Along with those hassles comes the self-explanatory risk for data corruption. That one is not a real problem as long as the system is kept running but in case it is shut down and the memory content is written back to the hard disk drive, the consequences can be catastrophic. For the drive, that is.

What does this spec mean?

Take for example 2.5-4-4 as the latency rating for a module. Latency is a measure of delay, that means the 2.5 rating in 2.5-4-4 indicates a 2.5 clock cycle delay. And the 4 ratings mean a 4 clock cycle delay. The clock cycle delays that these ratings are measuring is what determine how long it takes your CPU to write or remove data from memory. So the lower these latencies are, the less time your CPU spends idle waiting for data which results in higher performance. The position of the rating in 2.5-4-4 determines what latency the rating is referring to. The ratings, in order, represent the latency ratings for CAS, tRCD (RAS-to-CAS delay), and tRP (RAS Precharge). It would take a long time to explain what each of these latency ratings means, so to make a long story short the lower the latency the higher the performance of your CPU.

Why do some manufacturers indicate faster speed and/or lower latencies than Mushkin?

We make sure that all our modules run at the specified speed rating and above by a substantial margin. Many companies just meet the specs under optimal conditions, for instance with only one module installed. Keep in mind when looking at module ratings whether the company selling them rates them according to their abilities under heavy load on various chipsets. Meaning that these ratings need to represent what the module is capable of when installed with all the DIMM slots in various motherboards filled, which is what we do. Unscrupulous or naive memory resellers on the Internet will rate their modules by what they're capable of when running by themselves and on certain chipsets. Memory modules are generally capable of faster speeds and lower latencies when only one module is installed and on certain chipsets. So while it may look like their memory is faster than ours, in actuality they just came up with their ratings from ideal conditions that aren't representative OF ALL real world scenarios.So their memory isn't necessarily better than ours, they just have lower standards FOR rating their modules.Companies LIKE this will also have misleading tech support(i.e.It ' s your fault, NOT ours WHEN the modules won't run AS rated), AND poor refund policies WITH hefty restocking fees WHEN you want TO RETURN a module. ...."
 
mikeymike said:
i'd say use 2-3-3-7 not 2-3-3-5 as setting the total latency allowed to 5 cycles = whilst using 2-3-3 means some memory operations will not complete, therefore they will be forced to start again, using 2-3-3-7 will eliminate this, try downloading sandra from sisofts website and run the memory benchmark whilst using 2-3-3-5 then 2-3-3-7, even though you are increasing the total cycle time, your memory score should increase as you wont be cutting off write cycles before they finish

shame of it that its socket 939 so its ddr not ddr2, so my timing dont go this low, i only can get 2-2-5-2 not 2-2-2-5. ie the last number is not the lowest.
 
Back
Top Bottom