How important is "prime stable" vs "windows stable" ?

[Deleted member 4644]

If a cpu is not stable in prime, or ram is not memtest passing, how serous is that if its just a few errors?

Are we talking eventual HD corruption or just a lock up every few days?

 

[The Green Bean]

it will crash if an application stresses your CPU as much as Prime 95. I.E when gaming, using other CPU intensive tasks. It may also crash suddenly in normal windows usage.

 

[jazzboy]

Very much depends on the apps that your using. If you just play games and they all seem to work fine then being "mostly stable" should be fine.

However, if you use any software which does complex maths calcuations and stresses the fpu lots, then "mostly stable" isn't good enough. And then I believe that could definately cause problems in software like folding@home where theres a risk that you could sent incorrect results.

 

[Diogenes2]

Originally posted by: Deleted member 4644
If a cpu is not stable in prime, or ram is not memtest passing, how serous is that if its just a few errors?

Are we talking eventual HD corruption or just a lock up every few days?

Only you can decide what is acceptable..

If a lock up or blue screen now and then, is no problem for you, it's certainly not a problem for me..

 

[Deleted member 4644]

How about HD corruption?

 

[JEDIYoda]

Originally posted by: jazzboy
Very much depends on the apps that your using. If you just play games and they all seem to work fine then being "mostly stable" should be fine.

However, if you use any software which does complex maths calcuations and stresses the fpu lots, then "mostly stable" isn't good enough. And then I believe that could definately cause problems in software like folding@home where theres a risk that you could sent incorrect results.

There actually is no such risk!
folding@home has checks and balances built into it that prevent bogus results from being sent.....
Most if not all programs like folding@home had redudndancies built into them and prevent such things from happening.

 

[cbehnken]

Actually having important work to do with my machine requires it to NEVER crash. I mean run for months without errors.

 

[jazzboy]

Originally posted by: JEDIYoda

Originally posted by: jazzboy
Very much depends on the apps that your using. If you just play games and they all seem to work fine then being "mostly stable" should be fine.

However, if you use any software which does complex maths calcuations and stresses the fpu lots, then "mostly stable" isn't good enough. And then I believe that could definately cause problems in software like folding@home where theres a risk that you could sent incorrect results.

There actually is no such risk!
folding@home has checks and balances built into it that prevent bogus results from being sent.....
Most if not all programs like folding@home had redudndancies built into them and prevent such things from happening.

OK fair enough, I didn't know that myself.

 

[govtcheez75]

I don't risk running my computer if it's not completely stable, because I've experienced corrupted files in the past from doing so.

 

[NatePo717]

Mine isn't prime stable but stable enough so I can run games, movies, SolidWorks etc. without it crashing on me.

 

[CheesePoofs]

I hate when my computer crashes, so I ensure that it passes prime and memtest before I am willing to run it at its overclocked speeds. I don't want to ever have to worry about my computer crashing at completely random moments.

 

[theMan]

my oc is only 1hr prime stable. it fails after that. never had any other problems.

 

[Hacp]

I said no, but I make an exception when I get an error like 15 hours after I run prime .

 

[Thor86]

Originally posted by: Hacp
I said no, but I make an exception when I get an error like 15 hours after I run prime .

In the long run, that error will accumulate over time, and bang, your files are done.

Prime Stable 24+ hours is the best bet, for any ocing / heat test stability for cpu/ram.

 

[Hacp]

Originally posted by: Thor86

Originally posted by: Hacp
I said no, but I make an exception when I get an error like 15 hours after I run prime .

In the long run, that error will accumulate over time, and bang, your files are done.

Prime Stable 24+ hours is the best bet, for any ocing / heat test stability for cpu/ram.

Remember, if it fails after 15 hours of continous use, that means its pretty stable as it is. How many times do you put your CPU under that amount of stress for that long????

 

[coomar]

better to use the 6 hour prime with 3dmark01 looping than 24 hour

 

[imported_michaelpatrick33]

I only run Prime 95 unstable when I am tired of fiddling and don't feel like rebooting so I voted for the occasional use of processor overclock non Prime95 stable.

 

[imported_michaelpatrick33]

Originally posted by: Hacp

Originally posted by: Thor86

Originally posted by: Hacp
I said no, but I make an exception when I get an error like 15 hours after I run prime .

In the long run, that error will accumulate over time, and bang, your files are done.

Prime Stable 24+ hours is the best bet, for any ocing / heat test stability for cpu/ram.

Remember, if it fails after 15 hours of continous use, that means its pretty stable as it is. How many times do you put your CPU under that amount of stress for that long????

A distributed computing program like Folding@home etc. should probably require a 24hour Prime 95 stable just to ensure no errors in the distributed results.

 

[secretanchitman]

i hate priming. i even primed my comp at 2.4C, and it STILL freaking failed!

but i always run at 3.4C, and its never locked up on me...

 

[Markfw]

Never run prime. I use F@H, if no bad work units, then its OK. Runs 24/7 for weeks with no early unit end, its good.

 

[SynthDude2001]

I've never tested my computer for "Prine stability". It's not 100% stable (to be expected on a 2.4GHz overclock from a 1.46GHz CPU), but I have problems infrequently enough that it's not a big deal to me. The Athlon XP is kinda feeling old as it is, I don't really want to lower the CPU speed for the sake of absolute 100% stability. I know there are lots of others who won't even think of using an overclock if it's not Prime stable, but that isn't that important to me I guess.

 

[kamper]

I ran seti classic for a year+ with a non-prime-stable overclock and never had any problems.

 

[JustAnAverageGuy]

My 2500+ Barton @ 2.0GHz isn't Prime stable, but I've been running it this way for over two years now. Not a problem yet.

Then again, a Barton @ 2GHz isn't very impressive

 

[meson2000]

I run my S754 3400+ at stock speeds and my system isn't prime stable. Crashes after about 15 minutes for some reason. However, I have run endless loops of SETI@home, 3DMark 2003, 3DMark 2005, and Aquamark and never had one crash. My system has never frozen or crashed while gaming or during normal usage. I have a feeling that Prime95 isn't all that useful in determining stability.

 

[Aenslead]

having stable computer>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>&gt
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>&gt
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>&gt
>having fast computer.