The Socket 939 Appreciation Club and Knowledgebase [Official] - Page 608 - Overclock.net

nategr8ns · 07-25-08

that sucks blitz... is it the processor or motherboard?!?

**thlnk3r** · 07-25-08

Quote:

Originally Posted by blitz6804

The atomic-failure: The processor will not POST at anything more than 2400 MHz. Yes, even at 1.600 V (max for my board if I remember right)

Blitz, what is the maximum HTT (reference clock) on that motherboard? Did you supply any chipset voltage? Did you receive the same K8NSC-939 or is it a different one?

Good luck

blitz6804 · 07-25-08

I got back my K8NSC-939; the serial numbers match. The highest HTT I have successfully ran with my Toledo was 274. Yes, I applied the max chipset voltage available to me (+0.2V).

The motherboard is already back in its box awaiting a rainy day.

**txtmstrjoe** · 07-25-08

Sub-Zero, your experience puts the lie to the oft-repeated claim (back in the halcyon days of S939) that "all San Diegos are outstanding overclockers." Considering the same motherboard sustained a very healthy overclock with a Toledo, I'm inclined to think the San Diego is a much more stubborn CPU.

Sorry I haven't been around, guys and gal. A virus has infected me (not my computer) and made vertical moments difficult to maintain.

blitz6804 · 07-25-08

Or, it was not fully fixed, a contention I would believe given the last repair job.

boonie2 · 07-25-08

So thats 3 repairs total on it? ouch

Anqt31 · 07-25-08

Hey guys, I have been experimenting with my Trc timings. They are stock at 16, I used 3Dmark03 and compared them at 16 to 8. Look at my results.

Here's @ 16

Here's what I was surprised with @ 8

So Trc timings do make a difference. In 3dmark03, this was almost 18,000 points. I suspect in 3dmark06, this would be a 2000-3000 point jump.
Also, my processor was @ 2.6Ghz (1.4V) and my ram was running @ 400Mhz

**txtmstrjoe** · 07-25-08

Good bit of testing there, Anqt!

blitz6804 · 07-26-08

Quote:

Originally Posted by boonie2

So thats 3 repairs total on it? ouch

Two actually

Quote:

Originally Posted by Anqt31

So Trc timings do make a difference. In 3dmark03, this was almost 18,000 points. I suspect in 3dmark06, this would be a 2000-3000 point jump.
Also, my processor was @ 2.6Ghz (1.4V) and my ram was running @ 400Mhz

Yeah, there is a massive effect on performance even though you would never think that there would be. On the other hand though, there is also a massive effect on stability. The "ideal" setting for tRC is tRAS+tRP, while tRFC should be tRC +2, +3, or +4. When my RAM was in the process of going south, the only thing that kept it running was ultra-loose tRC/tRFC. I also found that my tRC/tRFC being too tight is what was preventing me from hitting HTTs higher than 255 on the Gigabyte. Only when they were dropped to 19/22 (respectively) could I hit my 3007 MHz suicide run.

That has since been dwarfed by my Abit's run, but the point still stands.

Anqt31 · 07-26-08

Quote:

Originally Posted by blitz6804

Yeah, there is a massive effect on performance even though you would never think that there would be. On the other hand though, there is also a massive effect on stability. The "ideal" setting for tRC is tRAS+tRP, while tRFC should be tRC +2, +3, or +4. When my RAM was in the process of going south, the only thing that kept it running was ultra-loose tRC/tRFC. I also found that my tRC/tRFC being too tight is what was preventing me from hitting HTTs higher than 255 on the Gigabyte. Only when they were dropped to 19/22 (respectively) could I hit my 3007 MHz suicide run.

That has since been dwarfed by my Abit's run, but the point still stands.

I have found that the tRC setting is perfectly stable @ 8 anywhere up to about 460mhz. After that, I am having to move the tRC back up to 12.

07-25-08	#6077 (permalink)
Anqt31 AMD Overclocker Join Date: Mar 2008 Posts: 739 Rep: 60 Unique Rep: 56 Trader Rating: 1	Hey guys, I have been experimenting with my Trc timings. They are stock at 16, I used 3Dmark03 and compared them at 16 to 8. Look at my results. Here's @ 16 Here's what I was surprised with @ 8 So Trc timings do make a difference. In 3dmark03, this was almost 18,000 points. I suspect in 3dmark06, this would be a 2000-3000 point jump. Also, my processor was @ 2.6Ghz (1.4V) and my ram was running @ 400Mhz __________________ SOCKET 939 APPRECIATION CLUB Last edited by Anqt31 : 07-25-08 at 10:26 PM Reason: Trc, not Tras

		Overclock.net - Overclocking.net > AMD > AMD - General
The Socket 939 Appreciation Club and Knowledgebase [Official]

Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)