CPU limiting overclock rather than memory? This makes no sense!

[SpideyCU]

Motherboard: EPoX 8RDA+
CPU: XP 2100+
RAM: 2*512 MB of PC2700 (Kingston ValueRAM)

Here's the deal:

CPU & RAM in sync at 133 MHz: stable

CPU at 133 MHz, RAM at 166 MHz: stable

CPU & RAM in sync at 166 MHz: instability sets in!

All done using default multiplier.

WHAT!?!?! You're going to have me believe that this lowly Kingston ValueRAM isn't the limitation, but my 2100+, a known overclocking champ, IS!? I can't remember the week on this processor (I'll have to see if I can find a picture to verify), but I believe it's 0201 (EDIT: 0301 verified, my memory wasn't quite there). Again, will have to check on that shortly.

By the way, at 166, the "instability" I mean is that Prime95 crashes within seconds of running, whereas right now at 133/166, it's been running for, oh, 8 hours or so without issue. I've also crashed out of Warcraft III and BF1942 when running at 166/166, so it's not just a Prime95 fluke.

What on earth is going on here? I've never had an issue like this where the processor, a proven overclocking maniac by all these people, could be the source of my limitation?

Temps are fine, if you're going to ask. CPU idle temp is 8-9 degrees C above case/room temperature, rising to 11-12 degrees C under load. Given my room temperature at the moment, CPU temp is around 39 C with that SK-7 sitting on it.

If anyone can shed some light on this, I'll gladly take advice. I'd like to blame the RAM (since this brand and size of memory has been known to have issues with nForce2 boards, but I RMA'd it and got two fresh sticks), but I can't believe that the processor is at fault. I'm missing something here...

 

[pillage2001]

0201?? 2002 week1?? Tbreds aren't even made. All these make sense as no one xp2100 is guaranteed to overclock. try Increasing voltage. I think you've got a dud.

 

[ChampionAtTufshop]

if that is the week, ur cpu is definitly a limiting factor (palomino)

 

[abr27440]

Originally posted by: ChampionAtTufshop
if that is the week, ur cpu is definitly a limiting factor (palomino)

yepo

 

[SpideyCU]

It's definitely not a Palomino, the core is certainly a T-bred. I just tried remembering the date # off the top of my head, but like I said, I just pulled it out of a a very *vague* memory. I could be confusing that number with my old 1600+ or something.

 

[pillage2001]

Originally posted by: SpideyCU
Well it's not a Palomino, I just tried remembering the # off the top of my head. If that can't be a T-bred then that's definitely not it, heh.

It's not a Tbred if it's made in 2002 week1. Then..what it is???

 

[SpideyCU]

I editted my previous statement to be clearer. Essentially: do not read too much into that number. In fact, I'll remove it from the first post altogether if it keeps confusing people. Once I get my 80 GB drive back into my system and go through my pictures to find the *actual* number, I'll update.

EDIT: Ha! Found a picture on my old server. 0301. That makes more sense.

EDIT again: WCPUid shot in case you don't believe me that this is a T-bred.

 

[pillage2001]

Bump the voltage up by abit till you achieve stability. Not all CPUs are made the same.

 

[SpideyCU]

I know, but I've run across others with this stepping and they could at least hit 166 fine without issue. I could've sworn there was a third variable here I was ignoring...but so be it. I'll see if inching the voltage bit by bit helps. Danke.

 

[Chumpman]

To eliminate the CPU factor why not drop the multiplier and then try it at 166.

 

[SpideyCU]

I did just that this morning, actually. I kicked it down to 10.5*166, no problems. I always liked to get my overclock as far as I could without having to really touch the core voltage, but since this isn't even matching my RAM's stock speed, I suppose it wouldn't hurt 'er to put it up a tad.

EDIT: upped the Vcore to 1.65 V, Prime's been going fine for about half an hour now, whereas before it would give an error right off the bat. Will let 'er run for a couple more hours before I'm satisfied. I'll stop my complaining now. I went and did a search for 2100+ and saw that a lot of people needed to up it from 1.6 to 1.65 in order to run 166 MHz at default multiplier...so this isn't as "unique" as I thought. I guess I was spoiled by my old 1600+ Palomino. Live and learn!