Currently running athlon xp 2500 at 210x11.5= 2415mhz!!!

[Techie333]

I am building this new system for my friend.......still waiting on memory, but used one of my kingston hyper-x 256mb pc3000 memory modules for his system.......I was just messing around with it and it posted at 2415mhz!!! SPECS:
memory timings: 6-2-2-2
fsb: 210mhz
memory fsb: 175mhz
CPU clock ration: 11.5
Biostar M7NCD Pro mobo.
Ahtlon XP Barton 2500+
temps idle: 45C (untested load as i haven't loaded windows yet but am now)
SK-7 Heatsink
About 48CFM YS-Tech fan for CPU
Arctic Silver 3 Thermal Compound

This sucks! My system won't even post at 170mhz fsb........lol.......crappy memory........he will be pleased.

 

[DAPUNISHER]

Posting@2.42ghz is one thing, stability under load is quite another of course. What vcore were you using? If default then that's pretty damned good and it may be capable of 3200+ spec with little or no vcore increase+you will be his bestest friend ever

 

[Techie333]

Ya, stock voltage, but hold on a minute...........looks like it can't load windows........ur rite.........lemme get back to you on this..

EDIT: Looks like for Windows to Install properly Ill have to bring the FSB down and then try this again..........would increasing the voltage make it stable?

 

[DAPUNISHER]

Upping the vcore will help, but you don't want to load windows using an overclocked system My mantra is always install everything at default values then a couple days of stress testing, and then if it's passed all the stress testing begin the overclocking. I would shoot for 2.2ghz on the lowest possible vcore it'll handle stable then go from there.

 

[BaboonGuy]

if it aint stable it aint nothin

 

[dannybin1742]

yeah try 1.75vcore my 2500+ (0315) runs flawlessly at 2406 (200X12)

53 load

 

[Jeff7181]

I can post at 2.5 Ghz... but it won't boot into Windows.

 

[Blackroot]

Shouldn't push it to hard, i wouldn't go more then 2.3, after that, it'll prolly start to wear down processor alot faster then you may want it.

 

[Techie333]

Originally posted by: Blackroot
Shouldn't push it to hard, i wouldn't go more then 2.3, after that, it'll prolly start to wear down processor alot faster then you may want it.

OCing your processor wears it down faster???!!

 

[Blackroot]

I am hopeing that is sarcastic if not this is what i have to say


...Text

 

[Soulkeeper]

i've gotten my system to boot that speed
good luck getting it stable !!

 

[m1ke101]

Originally posted by: Blackroot
Shouldn't push it to hard, i wouldn't go more then 2.3, after that, it'll prolly start to wear down processor alot faster then you may want it.

cough

 

[Soulkeeper]

it is the voltage firstly (electromigration) and the temp secondly that usually leads to the slow death of a chip
if the chip runs really high on default voltage then more power to it
you just got a chip capable of a rating that amd has yet to release
i just try to keep t-bred's and bartons under 1.8 or 1.75 volts if i can for normal operation


sweet deal

 

[Shimmishim]

yeah getting it stable is the fun part!

hours and hours of memtest and prime will keep you plenty busy!

so yeah the khx 3000... you may have some that used... i think it's winbond bh-5 or 6 but they are supposed to be REALLY good...

nice system and good luck on the o/c

i once posted my 1700+ @ 2.6 ghz... that was fun

 

[pspada]

Mathmatics of a processor "wearing down":

They build a processor to have only a certain number of clockcycles in it. Assuming a processor running at 2Ghz, and at this normal clockspeed it will use up those clockcycles in, say, 20 years. But if you then run it at 2.5GHz it will use up that finite number of clockcycles built into it in only 15 years. That's how your processor wears out.

Sounds logical? :Q

 

[GoHAnSoN]

Originally posted by: pspada
Mathmatics of a processor "wearing down":

They build a processor to have only a certain number of clockcycles in it. Assuming a processor running at 2Ghz, and at this normal clockspeed it will use up those clockcycles in, say, 20 years. But if you then run it at 2.5GHz it will use up that finite number of clockcycles built into it in only 15 years. That's how your processor wears out.

Sounds logical? :Q

lol, i really think this is a myth..... they dont want you to OC

but constant changing core voltage might have bad effect.
anyway, it will be ok once you settle down with what you are satisfied.

 

[Blackroot]

I tihnk overclocking doesn't do that much, really until you start messing with the core voltage alot, like gohanson mentioned.

 

[Soulkeeper]

Originally posted by: GoHAnSoN

Originally posted by: pspada
Mathmatics of a processor "wearing down":

They build a processor to have only a certain number of clockcycles in it. Assuming a processor running at 2Ghz, and at this normal clockspeed it will use up those clockcycles in, say, 20 years. But if you then run it at 2.5GHz it will use up that finite number of clockcycles built into it in only 15 years. That's how your processor wears out.

Sounds logical? :Q

lol, i really think this is a myth..... they dont want you to OC

but constant changing core voltage might have bad effect.
anyway, it will be ok once you settle down with what you are satisfied.

i read your sig too
i'm gonna be setting up an a7v classic with a 1700+ again too
that board was one of the best purchases i've ever made even tho it can't do 133fsb

 

[lordtyranus2]

They build a processor to have only a certain number of clockcycles in it. Assuming a processor running at 2Ghz, and at this normal clockspeed it will use up those clockcycles in, say, 20 years. But if you then run it at 2.5GHz it will use up that finite number of clockcycles built into it in only 15 years. That's how your processor wears out.

Are you serious? So, essentially, you use up your CPU around 25% faster in that case.

 

[jiffylube1024]

Originally posted by: GoHAnSoN

Originally posted by: pspada
Mathmatics of a processor "wearing down":

They build a processor to have only a certain number of clockcycles in it. Assuming a processor running at 2Ghz, and at this normal clockspeed it will use up those clockcycles in, say, 20 years. But if you then run it at 2.5GHz it will use up that finite number of clockcycles built into it in only 15 years. That's how your processor wears out.

Sounds logical? :Q

lol, i really think this is a myth..... they dont want you to OC

but constant changing core voltage might have bad effect.
anyway, it will be ok once you settle down with what you are satisfied.

^ This theory does not make any sense. If a CPU can do 2.25 Ghz @ a certain voltage, and 2.0 GHz at that same voltage with a minimal temperature difference (good cooling obviously) then at either speed you will get similar component life.

The way it really works is that CPU's have a certain tolerance for voltages/temperatures. At higher voltage (and at really high temperatures) the transistor gates oxides faster (the transistors break down). If your CPU temps are reasonable however (ie <50C) then you usually have nothing to worry about.

 

[pspada]

Originally posted by: lordtyranus2

They build a processor to have only a certain number of clockcycles in it. Assuming a processor running at 2Ghz, and at this normal clockspeed it will use up those clockcycles in, say, 20 years. But if you then run it at 2.5GHz it will use up that finite number of clockcycles built into it in only 15 years. That's how your processor wears out.

Are you serious? So, essentially, you use up your CPU around 25% faster in that case.

Of course I'm not being serious. A vendor could not build in only a certain number of clockcycles for a cpu.

 

[Ticktanium2038]

Little advice when overclocking systems.

1- Install windows before overclocking anything to ensure a good system install.
2-Ghost, Acronis, etc 2 backup images of your system before overclocking.
This gives you a good restore point should your overclocking venture destroy core OS drivers or files.
3- Overclock away.

If your machine is already loaded for bear try to borrow a small hard drive to swap out and do the above to see how far stably the machine will go.

There is nothing worse than having to re-load windows because overclocking corrupted some of your files.

 

[Techie333]

Ok....here's an update, thanks for all your help guys. I finally got it rock stable at about 2.35 ghz by increasing the voltage .5V!!!

 

[Jeff7181]

.5 or .05?

 

[pillage2001]

Originally posted by: Techie333
Ok....here's an update, thanks for all your help guys. I finally got it rock stable at about 2.35 ghz by increasing the voltage .5V!!!

0.5V??? You're gonna get screwed in a few months time.