Welcome Guest ( Log In | Register )

Bump Topic Topic Closed RSS Feed
8 Pages < 1 2 3 4 > » Bottom

Outline · [ Standard ] · Linear+

 INTEL OVERCLOCKING THREAD, TIPS,Q n A, Results...Great For NueBis

views
     
clawhammer
post Nov 20 2007, 12:01 AM

///M
Group Icon
VIP
8,788 posts

Joined: Jan 2003
From: Kuala Lumpur




QUOTE(wodenus @ Nov 19 2007, 11:11 PM)
What are you going to use if you upgrade ? usually the best air coolers are never around until the socket has been in use for a while smile.gif even if the best coolers came out immediately, you'd have to spend another Rm350 . If you use a phase change you can use it for years. I think in the long term you'll come out ahead. The GeminII's already obsolete, according to Xbitlabs it can't even cool a quad core enough for any decent OC-ing.
*
I'm not a good oc-er but just wanted to have a bit of fun biggrin.gif I'm still considering what to get since I'm using the stock cooler now.
clawhammer
post Nov 20 2007, 12:32 AM

///M
Group Icon
VIP
8,788 posts

Joined: Jan 2003
From: Kuala Lumpur




Actually I'm running 5:6 divider so the FSB is at 475Mhz now. I haven't tried going more than 400FSB 1:1 and the max was 3.2Ghz smile.gif
clawhammer
post Nov 20 2007, 02:05 AM

///M
Group Icon
VIP
8,788 posts

Joined: Jan 2003
From: Kuala Lumpur




QUOTE(wodenus @ Nov 20 2007, 01:28 AM)
So 5:6 means your RAM is at.. 570 MHz ?
*
Emm, it's 475 only:

user posted image
clawhammer
post Nov 20 2007, 02:47 PM

///M
Group Icon
VIP
8,788 posts

Joined: Jan 2003
From: Kuala Lumpur




§layerXT, higher FSB should be more beneficial than lower FSB with tighter timings. This can also be seen if we run benchmarks. Of course, I'd like to run 480 1:1 if possible biggrin.gif
clawhammer
post Nov 20 2007, 04:58 PM

///M
Group Icon
VIP
8,788 posts

Joined: Jan 2003
From: Kuala Lumpur




wodenus, in fact timings would play a role too but in this scenario, it's a difference of 75Mhz between 400FSB (1:1) VS 475FSB (5:6).

In terms of timings, 400FSB 1:1 might be tighter (14-4-4-4) compared to 474FSB 5:6 (15-6-6-5) but is it enough to compensate the gain from the 75Mhz FSB increase?

I'm not sure but running memory benchmark shows that FSB at a higher frequency (in this case 475Mhz) shows better numbers eventhough the timings are more relaxed. Opinions anyone? smile.gif
clawhammer
post Nov 20 2007, 05:16 PM

///M
Group Icon
VIP
8,788 posts

Joined: Jan 2003
From: Kuala Lumpur




Memory Bandwidth Benchmark, not the latency one. Shall I conclude Latency should be placed first then only bandwidth?
clawhammer
post Nov 20 2007, 10:03 PM

///M
Group Icon
VIP
8,788 posts

Joined: Jan 2003
From: Kuala Lumpur




Cool stuff wodenus, thanks biggrin.gif
Btw, how about the FSB gain? In terms of 75Mhz increase, are there any formula to see how much benefit?
clawhammer
post Nov 21 2007, 01:12 AM

///M
Group Icon
VIP
8,788 posts

Joined: Jan 2003
From: Kuala Lumpur




I think that's basically the load temp with stock coolers. I'm having that sort of load temp myself smile.gif
clawhammer
post Nov 24 2007, 11:04 AM

///M
Group Icon
VIP
8,788 posts

Joined: Jan 2003
From: Kuala Lumpur




After reading around, I came to a conclusion whereby it's always best to run 1:1 with the lowest CAS latency as possible.
clawhammer
post Nov 24 2007, 09:38 PM

///M
Group Icon
VIP
8,788 posts

Joined: Jan 2003
From: Kuala Lumpur




The rationale is that we should get the RAM running at lowest CAS latency as possible. As such it's better to get 400Mhz 1:1 14-4-4-4 than 470Mhz 5:6 15-5-5-5

I'm not sure how true this is smile.gif
clawhammer
post Nov 24 2007, 10:01 PM

///M
Group Icon
VIP
8,788 posts

Joined: Jan 2003
From: Kuala Lumpur




I suppose that can be done but I've never tried smile.gif
clawhammer
post Nov 24 2007, 11:34 PM

///M
Group Icon
VIP
8,788 posts

Joined: Jan 2003
From: Kuala Lumpur




QUOTE(wodenus @ Nov 24 2007, 10:56 PM)
Why not try it ? smile.gif
*
I'll do it soon as I'm currently trying 405 x 8 with my lapped CPU and stock cooler smile.gif
clawhammer
post Nov 25 2007, 12:54 AM

///M
Group Icon
VIP
8,788 posts

Joined: Jan 2003
From: Kuala Lumpur




Does the latest BIOS provides better overclockability or the same? smile.gif
clawhammer
post Nov 26 2007, 03:02 PM

///M
Group Icon
VIP
8,788 posts

Joined: Jan 2003
From: Kuala Lumpur




wodenus, I wanted to get some used coolers but not many good ones are available. Maybe you should sell me yours for a good price biggrin.gif
clawhammer
post Nov 26 2007, 05:41 PM

///M
Group Icon
VIP
8,788 posts

Joined: Jan 2003
From: Kuala Lumpur




Btw, my BIOS is F5 currently so any good to update with the latest one? If there are no speed or overclocking improvements, I might as well stay as it is.
clawhammer
post Nov 27 2007, 06:53 PM

///M
Group Icon
VIP
8,788 posts

Joined: Jan 2003
From: Kuala Lumpur




Yesterday, I manage to get my hands on a new Cooler Master GeminII w/ 2x120mm Icute fans.

They aren't the best fans around but very reasonably priced and produces better air flow

compared to the Cooler Master fans.

I had to remove everything on my small tiny case to fit the GeminII and at the same time

manage to tidy up the cables. The base of the GeminII looks flat and I was very indecisive

on whether I should lap it. After thinking for a while, I chose not to lap it (and now I

regret) biggrin.gif

Once I got everything ready, I powered on the system. Windows booted fine and idle temp was

at 24C-26C. I immediately ran Orthos (Small FFT) and load temp went all the way to 54C-56C

(Vcore @ 1.3875). Well, a very good improvement from the stock cooler which normally gives

me around 65C-67C.

The fans are now a nuisance because they produce terrible noise and bumping the Vcore to

1.4125V and running Orthos (Small FFT) resulted a load temp of 60C-62C under a 25C air

conditioned room.

I'm not sure if these temps are good but all are reported by Core Temp 0.95 and cross

checked with Everest - same results. I'm using MX2 thermal paste and please also share your cooling results with this GeminII.
clawhammer
post Nov 27 2007, 10:34 PM

///M
Group Icon
VIP
8,788 posts

Joined: Jan 2003
From: Kuala Lumpur




kucingfight, I'm trying 408x8 now (running Orthos small FFT). I'll check out the GeminII thread but I thought different motherboard reads temp differently? Things has changed? biggrin.gif

wodenus, yeah was at 405FSB. I'm now with my side panel opened at it's only 56C load.
clawhammer
post Nov 27 2007, 11:10 PM

///M
Group Icon
VIP
8,788 posts

Joined: Jan 2003
From: Kuala Lumpur




kucingfight, looks like you've got much better temps than me biggrin.gif Did you try Orthos? I notice it stresses the CPU even more.

I'm running Orthos more than 400FSB but it isn't stable yet and adding more Vcore might be required.
clawhammer
post Nov 28 2007, 02:59 AM

///M
Group Icon
VIP
8,788 posts

Joined: Jan 2003
From: Kuala Lumpur




Attached Image
I just finished a game of dota, had Orthos running on the background at 406x8 (1.4125V)
I'd be happy to hit 3.3Ghz at least biggrin.gif
clawhammer
post Nov 28 2007, 10:46 AM

///M
Group Icon
VIP
8,788 posts

Joined: Jan 2003
From: Kuala Lumpur




wodenus, I'll try running blend tonight but blend normally passes quite easily compared to small FFT.

At this point in time, 405 x 8 @ 1.40625 is stable (ran small FFT for 3-4 hours). How much Vcore do you need to run at 410?

8 Pages < 1 2 3 4 > » Top
Topic ClosedOptions
 

Change to:
| Lo-Fi Version
0.0569sec    0.58    7 queries    GZIP Disabled
Time is now: 1st December 2025 - 02:38 PM