2200+ won't unlock??

[magnux]

I don't get it.. first, I tried with a rear window defogger kit. I connected only the 5th bridge on L3 like Deerhunter had advised and tried to lower my multi to 12.5@133FSB, but the system would not post. So, I picked up some conductive silver and tried again.. still, won't post. Am I missing something? This is quite frustrating!!

ABIT KX7-333 Rev 1.1
AMD XP 2200+ AIRGA

 

[JustStarting]

rub a toothpic or something "gentle" across the dots. they are usually covered with a slight film- enough to prevent you from making the bridge.

 

[magnux]

Hrm. That's the best advice I've had all day. I'll definately give that a whirl, thanks.

 

[JustStarting]

I think the 2400's are the ones that you need to connect the 5th L3?? Do you have all the L1's connected?? I could be wrong , but the L3 thing is for 2400+, and only works on certain mobo's.

 

[Duvie]

Well while the 2200+ is a TBred like the 2400+ there was some revisions between the rev A and B chips...Bridges?? I don't know, but definitely double check that the info to unlock was for a 2200+ chip whether it be Rev A or B...

 

[magnux]

JustStarting's tip worked! The 2200+ is now unlocked! I set it to 166FSB@x11. Vdimm at 2.75, Vcore +0.25. System booted, but when in the bios the screen just got garbled. Most likely my ram. Now I need to try and find my sweet spot. How I do that, is beyond me at this point.. I gotta go find an OC'ing guide now!

Thanks guys!

 

[magnux]

I've got it at 150@x12 (1800Mhz). My goal is to have 166FSB @ 1800Mhz (stock) at least. I'll worry about OC'ing once I'm at 333 Let's see how stable it is right now.

 

[JustStarting]

glad it worked!!

 

[magnux]

Hrm, I can't seem to get it stable past 150FSB. I've upped the core to 1.75 max, and the Vdimm to 2.75 max. Still, not stable. *shrug* I'm putting my money on the RAM.. Crucial PC2100 just doesn't seem to cut it. :-/

 

[magnux]

Welp. So far, it seems stable running at 166FSB@x11 1.85VCore 2.85VDimm

3DMark score of 12797.

Well, I should be happy it's stable.. but I'm still wondering why the hell my 3DMark scores are still so low. I get 11500 default. *sigh*

XP 2200+ AIRGA
Abit KX7-333
Crucial PC2100 256MBx2
ATI Radeon 9700 Pro

 

[JustStarting]

Originally posted by: magnux
Welp. So far, it seems stable running at 166FSB@x11 1.85VCore 2.85VDimm

3DMark score of 12797.

Well, I should be happy it's stable.. but I'm still wondering why the hell my 3DMark scores are still so low. I get 11500 default. *sigh*

XP 2200+ AIRGA
Abit KX7-333
Crucial PC2100 256MBx2
ATI Radeon 9700 Pro

Well, the reason your scores aren't much higher is that you only have a 26mhz OC (11*166= 1826). The only thing giving you the increased performance is the higher FSB- not the OC.

 

[magnux]

Oh, no I understand fully why the increase from 11500 to 12797 is so little. My concern is why I scored so low (11500) in the first place. Guys with XP 2100+'s score higher. *shrug* I mean, I don't put too much faith into 3dMark2001 score's to begin with, the PC seems to run fine (and fast), it's more curiosity than anything.

 

[JustStarting]

What video card are you using?? Is it oC'ed??


You have to understand- some people only want a good "benchmark" number, and will do anything to get it. Look on madonion and compare your results to default" results. Some people with higher scores are resetting the test to lower resolutions to get those #'s. Check it out. Your score is on par with your system Generally I get 10% higher than the average score with my systems.

 

[magnux]

I'm using a Radeon 9700 Pro, and it is NOT O/C'd.

I understand, I usually try to benchmark my system under normal circumstances/settings. I'm not going to play a game with features set to low detail, etc.. so why benchmark that way? I couldn't agree more.

 

[Jeff7]

Originally posted by: magnux
I'm using a Radeon 9700 Pro, and it is NOT O/C'd.

I understand, I usually try to benchmark my system under normal circumstances/settings. I'm not going to play a game with features set to low detail, etc.. so why benchmark that way? I couldn't agree more.

Yeah, some of those numbers are insanely high; people tweaking their cards for maximum 3dmarks. No idea why they go to the trouble. My GF4 Ti4200 gives around 6000 3dmarks; others report scores thousands higher. Why? I too benchmark at realistic settings. Mipmap LOD at -0.5, Anisotropic filtering to level 4, and few other quality tweaks.

BTW, you're evil. Radeon 9700 Pro...


Oh yeah, the usual question for performance tweaks - did you install the latest 4-in-1's from VIA's site?
And you might want to consider getting some PC2700 or higher. That'll help performance, and allow even more FSB overclocking headroom.