PDA

View Full Version : I made it to 2.62 ghz wh00t!


PeterJensen
09-16-05, 08:32 AM
YAY! Happy day :p

40c idle, 55c max load. Sucks a bit its a old Clawhammer core, but it does pretty good :o Oh and its @ default vcore.

:p

Mr_LoL
09-16-05, 09:05 AM
congrats. mine blues screens at anything over 2.8

|MaguS|
09-16-05, 09:20 AM
congrats, I would (and can) go higher but my ram is limiting me.

superklye
09-16-05, 11:15 AM
I'm at 2.25 on my Venice 3000+ (1.8GHz stock) and definitely think I can push it more, I'm just too lazy to try right now. :p

Riptide
09-16-05, 11:37 AM
So are you guys all able to pass Prime95 blend test?

CaptNKILL
09-16-05, 11:46 AM
So are you guys all able to pass Prime95 blend test?
I am :D

The Venice core 3000+ is the new Thoroughbred B Core 1700+... the overclockability is just amazing :)

Mr_LoL
09-16-05, 12:04 PM
So are you guys all able to pass Prime95 blend test?

I failed that but the system hasnt crashed once. :D

superklye
09-16-05, 12:16 PM
So are you guys all able to pass Prime95 blend test?
I ran for almost 13 hours with no problems.

jAkUp
09-16-05, 12:17 PM
Mine used to do 2.75GHz when I had 1GB of ram.. running at a 1:1 ratio

CaptNKILL
09-16-05, 12:20 PM
I had mine to 2.7 but I was getting artifacts... my htt\memory clocks were pretty rediculous actually, so it could have been anything. If I get a better heatsink some time, I'll try to get my memory speed back to normal and get another 100 or 200Mhz on the CPU. Its not worth it right now though... Im not running into too many CPU bottlenecks with this beast ;) :D

Riptide
09-16-05, 12:35 PM
I ran for almost 13 hours with no problems.
Glad to hear it. Some people consider stability to be "game stable" and that's good enough. To me, if it can't pass Prime/Folding/Seti then it really isn't 100% stable. And I don't like to second guess things if I experience problems. ;)

Gotta throw in my little obligatory whine about how I envy you guys for having such damn good luck with this stuff. It blows me away that I had 3 CPUs in a row that didn't o/c worth a crap. :p

Ninjaman09
09-16-05, 01:08 PM
Gotta throw in my little obligatory whine about how I envy you guys for having such damn good luck with this stuff. It blows me away that I had 3 CPUs in a row that didn't o/c worth a crap. :p
Same here. Bastards. :D

CaptNKILL
09-16-05, 01:18 PM
Same here. Bastards. :D
hehe :D

Right now Im on my previous machine at work...

Athlon XP Tbred B 1700+ at 2.0Ghz :D

I've had great luck with overclocking CPUs... my 1800+ Palamino didnt OC for crap, but thats to be expected. With my 1700 and my 3000+ im 2 for 2 with overclocking CPUs and Im loving it. Its going to really suck when I get one that cant overclock at all :p

Riptide
09-16-05, 01:37 PM
I need the golden touch like you guys lol. ;)

My FX53 wouldn't go over stock hardly at all. Even at 2.5 it wouldn't Prime. That's only 100MHz. But put it back on stock settings and it would Prime until the cows came home.

Had a 3200+ and 3000+ winchester. The 3200+ wouldn't pass SuperPi 32M at over 2.2, and the 3000+ wouldn't make it over 2.0. Pretty damned disappointing.

It took me a long time to learn all the tricks of how to overclock the A64 as well. I learned a lot from doing it with my FX and I had hoped after learning how to do it that I'd have better luck with the Winchesters. Oh well... Not so.

jAkUp
09-16-05, 01:53 PM
When you OC'd your FX did you ever just try increasing the multiplier?

Also, did you change your memory ratio when you increased the FSB? Also make sure you are running your HTT at 4x.

Riptide
09-16-05, 02:00 PM
Increasing the multiplier didn't help. Even w/increase vcore, up to 1.65v, it wouldn't run stable at that clock speed. And damn did it run HOT. I quit bothering with that fast and used lower multis, trying to up FSB. The memory was good up to 250 at least, 2.5-3-3.

HTT was at 4x. Tried 3x even just to see if it would help. I always tried running 1:1 and looked for the best O/C I could achieve at that setting. Part of the reason I bought such nice memory in the first place (OCZ 3200EL Rev. 2, TCCD). ;)

Oh and yes, the locks on my board did work. And in the case of at least one of the Winchesters I tried it with both motherboards I had at the time (AV8 and A8V). No good. Also tried to o/c the FX with a Neo2. Didn't do much better there. It was the chip. Great at stock speeds, perfectly stable, but it was no o/c'er.

jAkUp
09-16-05, 02:08 PM
Yea Lee (he posts on this forum) brought his system over, and I could not get a good OC on his FX55 at all. That is the first chip I have ever come across that could barely even get a 100MHz OC. I think the Clawhammers are just terrible overclockers.

Riptide
09-16-05, 02:11 PM
They certainly seem to be in some cases although I have seen people do well with them. There are guys on abxzone that did OK, hitting up to 2.65-2.7 on air with their FX53's. Hell if I could match them. Best I could do was 250x10 and even then the computer was not Prime stable and I had to increase vcore to 1.625v. Ridiculous. So I gave up.

I expected more out of those winchesters though and was really surprised that they didn't go very far for me. Very disappointing.

PeterJensen
09-17-05, 02:46 AM
Yea Lee (he posts on this forum) brought his system over, and I could not get a good OC on his FX55 at all. That is the first chip I have ever come across that could barely even get a 100MHz OC. I think the Clawhammers are just terrible overclockers.

Dude, mine is a Clawhammer :p

jAkUp
09-17-05, 02:51 AM
Oh snaps :) Yea thats very good then :D

j0j081
09-17-05, 06:03 AM
clawhammers are the r0x0rs. we are the original a64s!

Kojiro
09-18-05, 11:28 PM
400Mhz may seem a lot. But if your working with say 2Ghz, and you in crease it to 2.4 GHz. It's only increases it's theoretical performance limit by 20%. It gets less an less the higher base speed you go. For example 2.6 to 3Ghz is a little over 15%.

I bet no one thought of it that way. Basicaly what I mean is that OCing will not give you that much of a performance increase. But if you do. It gives better results to slower CPU's. Why do you think Athlons are so good to overclock? A 3Ghz P4 at 3.4Ghz will only be a little more than 13% faster, while an 1.8Ghz Athlon 3000+ at 2.2Ghz is a little more than 22%. The same 400 mhz increases the Athlon's potential nearly 10% more than the Pentium 4!

Riptide
09-18-05, 11:36 PM
That's ofcourse just sheer processor speed. Overall system performance increase won't even equal that result because there are ofcourse other factors involved. IOW, a 20% increase in CPU speed won't necessarily produce an equivalent improvement in Doom 3 fps.

Superfly
09-19-05, 02:40 PM
OK Guys I have no experience O/Cing A64's - always had Intel systems till now.

anyways - I want to get this 3500+ upto 2.4 or maybe 2.5Ghz - I know the RAM is good from the Intel system it came out of, what I dont know is:

WTF is HTT?? - and 4x?? - I have settings for 1000mhz 800mhz etc etc etc

I can choose lower multi's but not higher - is the idea to lower the multi and clock the nuts out of the FSB???

can I O/C the CPU without changing the RAM frequency (and keep a 1:1 ratio)??

thanks chaps.

Riptide
09-19-05, 02:48 PM
anyways - I want to get this 3500+ upto 2.4 or maybe 2.5Ghz - I know the RAM is good from the Intel system it came out of, what I dont know is:
I wouldn't assume that because the A64 is known to be picky w/regard to RAM. That said your Ballistix has been pretty popular with them.
WTF is HTT?? - and 4x?? - I have settings for 1000mhz 800mhz etc etc etc
HTT - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hypertransport

Hypertransport speed should not go above 1000MHz. Basically the 4x/5x are dividers. Multiply the divider x your current FSB speed and you get the result. If you are overclocking up to 250MHz FSB, then you can use a 4x multiplier. 4x250=1000MHz. Kapesh? 5x250=1250MHz which would be bad.
I can choose lower multi's but not higher - is the idea to lower the multi and clock the nuts out of the FSB???
Yes.

Only FX series chips have the multiplier unlocked completely. Non FX chips you will need to raise FSB.
can I O/C the CPU without changing the RAM frequency (and keep a 1:1 ratio)??No.