thlnk3r

LOL WOW

__________________
AMD Overclocking Guides · Terms of Service · My CM690
Socket 939 Appreciation Club and Knowledgebase

txtmstrjoe

Yumping Yiminy, I just now got this!

Drug use FTL...

__________________

"What time is it? It's 9:39!" (The Official S939 Appreciation Club and Knowledgebase)My OCN Blog: Joe-Pinions (Have a Daily Nibble)

“Give a man a fish; you have fed him for a day. Teach a man to fish, and you have fed him for a lifetime.”—Lao Tzu (thanks to Blitz6804)

Today's "thlnk3r's thoughts": "You may fire when ready."

pioneerisloud

ROFL

Update on my overclock/undervolt progress!!
Well I reached 2.8GHz with my RAM @ 200MHz 2,3,2,6,1T with only running 1.25v through my CPU (1.26v under load). I'm now attempting 2.92GHz with the same (RAM @ 209MHz). My 2.8GHz run was stable with Orthos blended for 10 hours. Figured that was enough time for stability before I upped the clocks again . I gave up on having high speed RAM, instead I'm shooting for the tightest timings I can get...which these are it. I'm unsure if this is my best solution, but its all I can come up with. 3.0GHz @ 1.375v was just too much heat (67*C under load)....so I had to undervolt.

EDIT: Ok, so 2.92GHz was too much on those low of volts...back down to 2.8GHz and stressing for proof. If anybody else has any suggestions on someway to better this OC, please let me know.

312 x 9 = 2.80GHz (1.25v)
200MHz 2,3,2,6,1T RAM (2.90v)
3x HT Link
NB only overvolted
Load temps of 55-57ish *C.

__________________

thlnk3r

Pioneer, isn't it funny how heat is always the negative factor with everything. My vcore is at 1.34volts and I am still hitting 55C - 60C during Orthos blends

__________________
AMD Overclocking Guides · Terms of Service · My CM690
Socket 939 Appreciation Club and Knowledgebase

pioneerisloud

Yeah I hate that stupid thing called heat. I really wish I had the money to go water! Then I'd be happy at 3.0! Anyways, any suggestions to my 2.8Ghz OC I listed above, or something else I should shoot for perhaps, it'd be much appreciated. I can pretty much hit anything from stock to 3.0GHz stable. Its just a matter of the RAM settings which seem to be ok up to 233MHz.

__________________

txtmstrjoe

Well, if the heat's bothering your chips, you can always strip 'em naked.

Right?

pioneer, I know that you, for one, love seeing a topless CPU.

__________________

"What time is it? It's 9:39!" (The Official S939 Appreciation Club and Knowledgebase)My OCN Blog: Joe-Pinions (Have a Daily Nibble)

“Give a man a fish; you have fed him for a day. Teach a man to fish, and you have fed him for a lifetime.”—Lao Tzu (thanks to Blitz6804)

Today's "thlnk3r's thoughts": "You may fire when ready."

blitz6804

Wait, so you can get DDR 400 by undervolting the processor? That would make sense I guess, because under load, I cannot get the RAM over 393 MHz, but when CnQ is engaged (and voltage drops to 1.1 V), RAM shoots up to 417 MHz without issue.

Maybe I will just give up on CnQ entirely by consistently undervolting it... as soon as I get my motherboard back, I will let you know.

__________________
¤ The Loricatus Draco life thread. Now with quad-CPU/quad-GPU madness! ¤
¤ It scores 21,009 3DMarks in 06 and P16,651 in Vantage at 3510 MHz. ¤
¤ Upgrade budget: ■■■■■■■■■■ ($0 / ∞) ¤
¤ B.S. in Chem., Cum Laude, Minors in Maths and Crim. Justice, J.D. {Pending} ¤
¤ Almost all PC parts come with manuals. Ask me to find yours! ¤
¤ Want a real socket? Get Socket 939! ¤
¤ Today Txtmstrjoe presents: "[Steppings] merely indicate possible outcomes due to the law of averages being in your favor." ¤
¤ Make it idiot-proof, and someone will make a better idiot. - ThinkGeek ¤

pioneerisloud

Well I can get DDR400 by overvolting as well. Seems you might be having some issues with CnQ perhaps? I don't remember you saying you had that turned on. When overclocking we generally will turn off CnQ because it messes with the overclock and will a lot of the times make a stable OC unstable.

EDIT: My issue isn't getting DDR400 speeds, my issue is getting the DDR500 speeds that my sticks are SUPPOSED to run at.

__________________

txtmstrjoe

Some clarification is in order here.

Undervolting the CPU does not make the RAM run at a certain speed. These elements are not directly related.

RAM speed is determined by the ratio between the reference clock (HTT clock, or "FSB") divided by a predetermined ratio, or divider, as set in the BIOS. At stock settings, the HTT clock is @ 200MHz. The RAM is also running at 200MHz (which, when double-pumped, results in DDR400) at stock, since the HTT clock and the RAM are running 1:1.

When the HTT clock is increased, the RAM also speeds up as a function of the ratio. Say you bump up the HTT clock to 210MHz; your RAM then runs at DDR420.

Frequently, though, RAM simply cannot keep up with the HTT clock's ability to scale its clock speeds upwards; this is why we use RAM dividers. Dividers slow down the RAM so it operates at a ratio of the HTT clock.

This is but one reason why it's wise to determine each of your subsytems' maximum potential clock speeds. For a stable OC, you won't be maxing out any one subsystem (the CPU would likely be the one that's closest to maxing out, unless you have super RAM that can scale really high); the subsystems' settings would all be within their tested maximums.

Hope this long-ish missive helps!

__________________

"What time is it? It's 9:39!" (The Official S939 Appreciation Club and Knowledgebase)My OCN Blog: Joe-Pinions (Have a Daily Nibble)

“Give a man a fish; you have fed him for a day. Teach a man to fish, and you have fed him for a lifetime.”—Lao Tzu (thanks to Blitz6804)

Today's "thlnk3r's thoughts": "You may fire when ready."

froggy1986

dang txtmstrjoe.... u should frickin write the comp terms for wikipedia...sry just had to point out the smarts

__________________
Official member of the ǝsɐq ǝbpǝ1ʍouʞ puɐ qn1ɔ uoıʇɐıɔǝɹddɐ 939 ʇǝʞɔos

In Response To a $tillLegendaryU2K Thread: