• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

1/5 PCI divisor is incredible....**Update..195FSB!**

Page 2 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.
Wait a minute...I do have an old PCI card here..I have no idea what it is though. The main chip says the following..

Trident
TGUI9440-1
F31056-UM.B
TMI D
TDQXD022-SW
9614
Trident '94

It has two memory chips that say the following..

SIEMENS
HY85141718J-60
Germany

It also has what appears to be a bios chip that has the following markings..

Trident Ver A5.4
'95 Trident Microsystems
'90 Phoenix Technologies
609C6312CNJDH011

What is this?
 
It's an MP, which is a Palomino core... The Athlon 4 which will be released in a few months is the exact same chip, it just has a different name.
 


<< A POS ... but on a serious note, lol, go try it out!!! >>



LOL, probably a 2MB, maybe 4MB. Trident cards, nothing better!!! Put that antiquity in there!
 
Ok..the Trident was DOA...I don't even know where the hell I got it...😉 Anyway...200FSB is a no go... It will post and get into Windows every few tries, but mostly I just get errors right before the desktop appears now. I think this Crucial has just hit it's limit..oh well. Where's that damn PC2700?!?! Anyway...I am pretty happy with 171FSB @ 8872222. I get a memory bench of 955/1070...not to shabby. Any FSB higher than that and I had to lower the memory settings so low that the score was always lower...even @ 190FSB..It was fun though!
 
Yummy - very tasty indeed, I hope Epox bring out an mp board with the same features..dribble..dribble..gotta be Crucial too
 
insane3d: Do you notice a difference in crashes between overclocking your cpu too high or overclocking your memory too high? I'd like to know. Thanks.
 
Yes actually. I seems when I have the CPU at it's limits, I mostly get random reboots. With memory, I get BSOD's. This is with Win2K, Win9X can be completly different...
 
When your cpu is overclocked too high do you get a BSOD then a reset and just a plain BSOD when your memory is overclocked too high?
 
when you hit 200 you can tell any P4 people who brag about the 400 (100 QDR) to suck it - I imagine 200 DDR is slightly better than 100 QDR because there is more imprecision for every new doubling (ddr worse than sdr, qdr worse than ddr, odr - octosomething would probably be too noisy for use at present)
 
insane, did you drop the multiplier further to get to the 195fsb? What multiplier did you use? 8x or 7.5x?
 
&quot;insane, did you drop the multiplier further to get to the 195fsb? What multiplier did you use? 8x or 7.5x?&quot;

Yeah, I dropped it to 7.

 
For people with fsb's over 166, what are your ram timings set at? When I change mine to 8882622 with a fsb of 166, I crash. I'm using Crucial PC2100 too set at 2.9v.
 
&quot;That must yield absolutely insane S@H speeds....&quot;

No, not really. I needed to back off my memory timings so much that the memory performance was a lot less than it is @ 171FSB with the most agressive timings, plus the CPU was clocked slower...under 1.4ghz. It does seem to be doing some work units a little faster @ 171 FSB though..🙂

&quot;For people with fsb's over 166, what are your ram timings set at? When I change mine to 8882622 with a fsb of 166, I crash. I'm using Crucial PC2100 too set at 2.9v. &quot;

I have never found that timing to be very stable at all. I know there was a thread about it being the &quot;safest&quot; setting, but I don't find it to work well at all. I find that 8862222 works the best, but to go over 168, I needed to drop it slightly to 8872222. Try those settings...🙂



 
Back
Top