Best Bang-4-Buck PERFORMANCE - Final O/C'ing results

[oldfart]

Win2K HT support is a debatable topic. Win2K thinks there are 2 physical CPU's. Supposedly, apps that are tuned for HT will not see the benefit. I never tried it, so I cant say for sure.

i'll have to look for some threads.....but

In general, CPU speed is king. Other tweaks are more subtle. The GAT settings do help, but can cause stability issues if you get too aggresive. Use tight ram timings. You can bump up the VDIMM to help there.

 

[bernse]

Glad you've got it working. I've had a P4-2.8C w/P4P800 Asus and 1MB of Infenion PC3200.
It is one of, if not easiest systems I've put together. Rock solid, even though my OC is mild. Great rig that'll probably be my main machine until next year.

 

[Acanthus]

Originally posted by: oldfart
Win2K HT support is a debatable topic. Win2K thinks there are 2 physical CPU's. Supposedly, apps that are tuned for HT will not see the benefit. I never tried it, so I cant say for sure.

i'll have to look for some threads.....but

In general, CPU speed is king. Other tweaks are more subtle. The GAT settings do help, but can cause stability issues if you get too aggresive. Use tight ram timings. You can bump up the VDIMM to help there.

I see improvements in all HT optimised benchmarks, if you have something youd like me to check out and bench in win2k with and without HT im willing.

I also see very significant multitasking performance increases. Large enough increases to be the difference between stuttering sound and choppy video to smooth playback with heavy backround tasks.

 

[apoppin]

Thanks for your replies . . . I see I have some research to do.

Is Munchkin's Advice Solid re:timings?

The ABit IC7 is 100% compatible with all Mushkin PC3200 and PC3500 Black series. Because the chipset works in "dual channel" mode, it is necessary to populate the board with a minimum of two identical DIMMs in the complementary slots in order to use the performance features.
USER TIPS: enabling any of the different performance options will override the manual latency and frequency ratio settings and force a 1:1 CPURAM ratio at 2:x:x:x latency settings, with the "Ultra" (now "F1") setting forcing a 2:2:2:5 latency configuration at DDR400 frequency.

We also found that using the "Turbo" (or "Street Racer") setting at 2:2:2:7 yields overall better performance since a longer tRAS prevents the controller from inadvertently terminating an ongoing data burst. Enabling the CPC (Command Per Clock) adds another small notch to the overall performance but can cause stability problems as well. The Read Delay timer should be set to 5-6 cycles for best stability and performance or else left on Auto.

We found that DIMMs that require CAS latencies of 2.5 or higher at DDR400 will not function in any of the available performance modes. The workaround is to set the performance tab to "Disabled". Even though this appears counterintuitive at first, it makes sense in that there is no point in reducing chipset latencies when the memory itself would add those latencies again at the back-end of the "food chain". The HW monitor shows voltage values that are below the real voltages, so better not crank them up too much.

EDIT: My PC-3500 is rated 2:3:3 @ 433Mhz DDR so I guess the above applies to my rig(?).

This rig better last me (at least) a COUPLE of years.

2nd EDIT: I'm off to work (after limited sleep) to pay for this . . . I 'll look forward to your replies this evening . . . Thanks for participating in this thread and helping me make a reasonable decision for a "cheapie performance system" . . . I'm pretty happy so far (especially with the incredible EASE of putting it together).

 

[Acanthus]

Sandra Multimedia:

HT enabled 2.6C @ default
Int 19984
Float 28843

HT disabled via bios 2.6C @ default
Int 16209
Float 19093

on win2k pro.

 

[oldfart]

COOL!

Can you do some TMPGEnc benches? With HT enabled/disabled in BIOS and En/Dis in the application settings?

Synthetic benches dont interest me (I hate SiSoft!)

 

[Acanthus]

Originally posted by: oldfart
COOL!

Can you do some TMPGEnc benches? With HT enabled/disabled in BIOS and En/Dis in the application settings?

Synthetic benches dont interest me (I hate SiSoft!)

Its the only app i had on hand that would show numbers quickly, where can i pick up TMPgenc?

Edit: i found it, will do some benches now. Be back soon.

 

[Acanthus]

Hmm i dont see any settings for enabling or disabling HT inside the app.
Edit: found the setting.

 

[oldfart]

Its under environmental/CPU/use multithread....and the other 3 options under....It doesn't say Hyperthread. I guess its for HT and dual CPU.

 

[Acanthus]

re-encoding a chapelle show episode using NTSC film default settings.

HT enabled: 5:52
HT disabled: 6:57

Edit: anything else youd like me to try?

 

[oldfart]

Nope! That proves that HT does work under Win2K.

Good info.

 

[Acanthus]

Originally posted by: oldfart
Nope! That proves that HT does work under Win2K.

Good info.

Im not sure why Intel doesnt officially support HT for win2k, there must stability problems with certain motherboards or drivers. I haven't personally seen any stability issues.

 

[MrChad]

Originally posted by: Acanthus

Originally posted by: oldfart
Nope! That proves that HT does work under Win2K.

Good info.

Im not sure why Intel doesnt officially support HT for win2k, there must stability problems with certain motherboards or drivers. I haven't personally seen any stability issues.

HT won't lead to stability problems in Win2K, but it won't lead to improved performance every time either. The thread scheduler in 2K cannot distinguish between dual physical processors and dual virtual processors (HT). As a result, certain applications may perform worse with HT enabled than with it disabled in 2K. In XP and 2003, virtual processors are distinguished from physical processors, hence the "official support." As always, YMMV, but you certainly shouldn't run into stability problems with 2K.

 

[Acanthus]

Originally posted by: MrChad

Originally posted by: Acanthus

Originally posted by: oldfart
Nope! That proves that HT does work under Win2K.

Good info.

Im not sure why Intel doesnt officially support HT for win2k, there must stability problems with certain motherboards or drivers. I haven't personally seen any stability issues.

HT won't lead to stability problems in Win2K, but it won't lead to improved performance every time either. The thread scheduler in 2K cannot distinguish between dual physical processors and dual virtual processors (HT). As a result, certain applications may perform worse with HT enabled than with it disabled in 2K. In XP and 2003, virtual processors are distinguished from physical processors, hence the "official support." As always, YMMV, but you certainly shouldn't run into stability problems with 2K.

So the case where you would actually lose performacne, in theory, would be old multithreaded applications like 3D studio max. Before it was HT aware?

 

[MrChad]

I will defer to people smarter than I am who have discussed this issue at length in the Operating Systems forum:

Does w2kpro Support Hyperthreading?
hyperthreading on windows 2000 pro

 

[apoppin]

Originally posted by: MrChad
I will defer to people smarter than I am who have discussed this issue at length in the Operating Systems forum:

Does w2kpro Support Hyperthreading?
hyperthreading on windows 2000 pro

So the answer is: YES . . .


. . . and . . .

. . . NO.

It'll be awhile before I migrate to XP . . . perhaps when HT is mainstream for games and apps.

Was the advice re: RAM timings from the Munchkin's website correct? . . . I am still working on installing service packs before I do major O/C'ing or benchmarking.

BTW, I got myself a Radeon 9600XT to evaluate while my 8500 is RMA'd.

 

[oldfart]

There is not an easy answer on the ram timing question.

The ratio, ram type (chips used), GAT, FSB speed all affect overall performance. The right combo is fast, the wrong combo is slow or unstable.

Set up the FSB to suite the CPU first. Get a CPU speed that you are comfortable with including cooling requirements. While doing this have the ram set to slow values. Once you settle on a FSB speed that optimizes the CPU GHz, move onto memory.

Dont use SPD. Set the timings manually. Try the GAT setting out and see what is stable. This is where it gets tricky. The mem timings and GAT settings do affect each other. It may take awhile to find the right combo. Do some benches and stability tests when you make changes. If the ram is BH5 based, you should be able to get some pretty tight timings out of it.

 

[apoppin]

Originally posted by: oldfart
There is not an easy answer on the ram timing question.

The ratio, ram type (chips used), GAT, FSB speed all affect overall performance. The right combo is fast, the wrong combo is slow or unstable.

Set up the FSB to suite the CPU first. Get a CPU speed that you are comfortable with including cooling requirements. While doing this have the ram set to slow values. Once you settle on a FSB speed that optimizes the CPU GHz, move onto memory.

Dont use SPD. Set the timings manually. Try the GAT setting out and see what is stable. This is where it gets tricky. The mem timings and GAT settings do affect each other. It may take awhile to find the right combo. Do some benches and stability tests when you make changes. If the ram is BH5 based, you should be able to get some pretty tight timings out of it.

Thank-you for your reply. I seriously doubt I was lucky enough to get the BH5 based RAM (it's Mushkin Performance Series Level 1 PC3500 2:3:3) . . .

Do you agree with the Munchkin "tips" I posted earlier for my (Abit 1C7-G) MB and their RAM? And finally . . . can you point me to some good threads that have a discussion on this?

 

[oldfart]

The ABit IC7 is 100% compatible with all Mushkin PC3200 and PC3500 Black series. Because the chipset works in "dual channel" mode, it is necessary to populate the board with a minimum of two identical DIMMs in the complementary slots in order to use the performance features.
OK
USER TIPS: enabling any of the different performance options will override the manual latency and frequency ratio settings and force a 1:1 CPURAM ratio at 2:x:x:x latency settings, with the "Ultra" (now "F1") setting forcing a 2:2:2:5 latency configuration at DDR400 frequency.
dont agree

We also found that using the "Turbo" (or "Street Racer") setting at 2:2:2:7 yields overall better performance since a longer tRAS prevents the controller from inadvertently terminating an ongoing data burst. Enabling the CPC (Command Per Clock) adds another small notch to the overall performance but can cause stability problems as well. The Read Delay timer should be set to 5-6 cycles for best stability and performance or else left on Auto.
turbo or street ricer @ 2-2-27 would be fast....IF your ram can handle it.

We found that DIMMs that require CAS latencies of 2.5 or higher at DDR400 will not function in any of the available performance modes. The workaround is to set the performance tab to "Disabled". Even though this appears counterintuitive at first, it makes sense in that there is no point in reducing chipset latencies when the memory itself would add those latencies again at the back-end of the "food chain". The HW monitor shows voltage values that are below the real voltages, so better not crank them up too much.
this seems like old info. The bios does not have a disabled GAT setting. The HW mon comment doesn't seem right either.

They dont metion what the FSB is at during all of this either. 200 MHz and 250 MHz are very different in the way you would set things up.

What FSB are you running?

 

[apoppin]

Originally posted by: oldfart
The ABit IC7 is 100% compatible with all Mushkin PC3200 and PC3500 Black series. Because the chipset works in "dual channel" mode, it is necessary to populate the board with a minimum of two identical DIMMs in the complementary slots in order to use the performance features.
OK
USER TIPS: enabling any of the different performance options will override the manual latency and frequency ratio settings and force a 1:1 CPURAM ratio at 2:x:x:x latency settings, with the "Ultra" (now "F1") setting forcing a 2:2:2:5 latency configuration at DDR400 frequency.
dont agree

We also found that using the "Turbo" (or "Street Racer") setting at 2:2:2:7 yields overall better performance since a longer tRAS prevents the controller from inadvertently terminating an ongoing data burst. Enabling the CPC (Command Per Clock) adds another small notch to the overall performance but can cause stability problems as well. The Read Delay timer should be set to 5-6 cycles for best stability and performance or else left on Auto.
turbo or street ricer @ 2-2-27 would be fast....IF your ram can handle it.

We found that DIMMs that require CAS latencies of 2.5 or higher at DDR400 will not function in any of the available performance modes. The workaround is to set the performance tab to "Disabled". Even though this appears counterintuitive at first, it makes sense in that there is no point in reducing chipset latencies when the memory itself would add those latencies again at the back-end of the "food chain". The HW monitor shows voltage values that are below the real voltages, so better not crank them up too much.
this seems like old info. The bios does not have a disabled GAT setting. The HW mon comment doesn't seem right either.

They dont metion what the FSB is at during all of this either. 200 MHz and 250 MHz are very different in the way you would set things up.

What FSB are you running?

Thanks for the quick replies . . . I am between "here" and d/l'ing Win updates.

Right now I am at "stock" - 200FSB. It appeared completely stable last night at 220FSB without messing with ANY timings, around 228 is where Windows exhibited instability.

I still have to UPdate all my drivers and service packs and THEN install the benchmark programs (a lot has changed - in a year or so - since I was interested in benchmarking a computer) to measure O/c'd stability . . . since I am on 56K dial-up . . . it'll be awhile.

UNTIL then, I am doing REsearch.

 

[oldfart]

Like I posted earlier. You really are not ready to mess with GAT and ram timings until you get your CPU and FSB speed figured out. Once you settle on a FSB, then you can dial in the mem/GAT stuff.

 

[apoppin]

Originally posted by: oldfart
Like I posted earlier. You really are not ready to mess with GAT and ram timings until you get your CPU and FSB speed figured out. Once you settle on a FSB, then you can dial in the mem/GAT stuff.

OK . . . got it .. . I'm a bit ahead of myself.

Thank-you for your help . . . I guess I'd better hit the archives and lurk in O/C'ing for awhile.

It really has been too fast for this old man - I really didn't expect my computer till this weekend - even with a FULL work schedule, I was waaaay too tempted to let it sit and just had to build it . . .

I guess I will re-install Unreal II to compare my new with my old 1.5Ghz setup . . . it'll be interesting to compare 2 generations of videocards (8500 v. 9600xt) also.

I'll report back when I am near to figuring it out.

 

[oldfart]

You will like the new rig. I also went from a pretty high end PIII rig (PIII-S 1.26 @ 1.5) to a P4 1.6 @ 2.4 and was pretty blown away @ the speed difference. Now, 2.6 @ 3.3 with HT is even better. You made the leap all at once. You must need a seatbelt on your chair! I run a 9800P which is pretty decent, but even with this setup, Far Cry demo really taxes it.

 

[apoppin]

Been playin' with It. I like it as it has exceeded my expectations. Thanks for your help.
Here's my system and (probably) final O/C'ing Report:

P4 2.80c
Abit IC7g
2x256mb PC3500 (Mushkin Level1 2:3:3)
Aspire X-dreamer w350w PS
[Radeon 9600xt/Maztor 40gb 7200/win2k]

It seems to "hit the wall" at 3.39Ghz - 4x242Mhz FSB - with stock voltage and CPU to RAM ratio of 5:4. +1 Mhz more and the temps climb and voltage needs to be increased to keep it stable.

It has posted at 3.6Ghz - even running Windows for awhile - but requires a LOT of OVERvoltage and the temps go WAY up.

OR, I can run it (also default voltage) 1:1 @3.06Ghz (221FSB - so my RAM is hitting 442Mhz, a bit over my PC3500's 433mhz rating).


Since I prefer 3.4Ghz - evidently the sweet spot for my rig - would it be wise to play with the RAM timings since they are currently UNDERclocked to 2x 193mhz (386Mhz data rate)?

Should I attempt to set them more aggressively - perhaps 2:2:2:5 - in an attempt to find more performance? Try the "Turbo" settings on my MB?
(I am pretty satisfied with my O/C and don't wish for more cooling, etc . . . just maximun PERFormance from what is there for now).

 

[apoppin]

Up for the morning shift . . . any suggestions for FINE-tuning a P4 o/c?
(see the post immediately above)