MSI?s K8N Neo 2 Falsifies its .5 Multipliers

[imported_michaelpatrick33]

Don?t Believe Your BIOS: MSI?s K8N Neo 2 Falsifies its Multipliers

www.sudhian.com/showdocs.cfm?aid=616

Potential real issue for Nvidia and/or MSI if true what Joel has found

Example from article:
According to CPUID and the motherboard BIOS itself, we are adjusting CPU speed in half-multiplier settings and raising bus frequency in a standard pattern. According to Everest, however, our half-multiplier settings do not exist at all. Instead, when a half-multiplier setting is called for, the motherboard ?approximates? the value of one by raising the front side bus further. This occurs ONLY on half-multiplier settings and occurs consistently; we tested all the way down to 8.5x and at a variety of bus speeds between 200 and 250 MHz. The same effect was always observed without fail?but only by Everest.

 

[PwAg]

So the simple remedy is just use whole integer multipliers until a new bios fixes the issue? Or does the problem stem deeper? This board still reaches insanely high overclocks. Why are people freaking like it's the biggest scandal of the quarter. heh.

 

[Subhuman25]

My response to this is that my MSI K8N Neo2 runs just fine as it's intended to run at stock settings for my equipment.Overclocking is not of any interest to me.
For those that are interested in overclocking I have to say that you need to remember you're running your equipment out of it's inteded operating parameters.That's fine as long as you don't mind voiding warranties and shortening your equipments life expectancies,but to thrash on an equipment manufacturer for their product not being able to operate outside of it's intended operational parameters is pure silly.
One look around the forums offers one a good insight into the plethora of problems overclocking poses.
It's become ridculous to sort out real equipment problems from those caused by overclocking and "bad" overclocking by those who are clueless.
What I don't understand is the logic(common sense) in overclocking when you get such minimal performance increases(in some cases even negligable over stock form) for such a high price(risk of parts failures,lessened life expectancy of parts,heat,noise + all the other problems it may cause)
Seems rather ridiculous in this age where mid-high range systems components are already racebred to begin with.
I'm perfectly happy with my AMD64 3500 running at stock speed and my Corsair XMS3200XL memory at stock settings nad my eVGA6800GT at stock settings.Hey,I even replaced the stock HSF's on both CPU & vidcard and added a front 120mm case fan and replaced my stock case PSU with a NeoPower 480W with 120mm fan to improve performance,cooling & quieting in my situatation.
What I got is an extremely stable,cool,quiet system that has overhead room.
I doubt I'll ever have any problems with my computer other than the usual MS software goof-ups that are unavoidable.And when it comes time to need to troubleshoot anything I can definitely rule out overclocking as a contributor to the problem I may be experiencing(yet another benefit of not overclocking)
And other than benchmarking my set-up against an identical set-up that's overclocked,I'd bet there were any visual,noticable difference in performance between mine and an overclocked system.
And even if there were,it would be so minute(negligable) it wouldn't mean much considering all the benefits I gain by not overclocking.
Am I making sense to anyone or has the entire computer world gone so overclock crazy that they can't reason and make sense anymore?
I guess it's as futile as trying to talk the gizmo gadget boyz out of tranforming their computers into portable discotheques

 

[sl33p]

Howcome you have such nice ram with no intent to OC?

 

[Subhuman25]

Because that nice RAM assures me reliability and good performance.Both of wich overclocking does not afford you.

 

[effee]

when was this discovered?

 

[Dizietsma]

http://forums.sudhian.com/mess...=73&threadid=67129

Looks like it does offer half multipliers afterall ..

Cough

 

[SteelWheeler]

Thanks SubHuman. I was planning on saying the same thing and you saved me quite a bit of typing. For some it is more interesting to try and squeak out a few more FPS on a benchmark than to actually use the computer for the reason you built it. It's like buying a Nissan and spending all of your time and money trying to make it an Infiniti. Eventually it takes a dump, so buy the Infiniti and know every day it is going to start.

 

[Subhuman25]

Originally posted by: SteelWheeler
Thanks SubHuman. I was planning on saying the same thing and you saved me quite a bit of typing. For some it is more interesting to try and squeak out a few more FPS on a benchmark than to actually use the computer for the reason you built it. It's like buying a Nissan and spending all of your time and money trying to make it an Infiniti. Eventually it takes a dump, so buy the Infiniti and know every day it is going to start.

No problem SteelWheeler.
It's not meant to bash overclocking,but rather to give some insight to a few folks that overclocking means taking your components out the boundaries of their official operating spec's.And like with anything electrical/mechanical it will pose realibility,longevity,configuration,temperature,noise,power consuption issues.Once you start it kinda acts like a chain reaction.One thing leads to another.And problems may begin occuring after overclocking wich makes troubleshooting more diffcult because now you have to factor in the OC'g aspect into all of it.No thanks.
IMHO OC's doesn't yield enough performace gain to forfeit reliability,longevity,stable performance with overhead to spare,ideal temp's,silence,less troubleshooting variables etc. Not to mention most warranties are also forfeited with OC'g.
One thing I have noted in the year of computer building is that the AMD crowd is by far a more eager overclocking community than the Intel crowd.Before I built my current system I had gone through several Intel systems,never overclocked because performance was great stock.This time I ventured back into AMD territory since it appeared that the Nforce chipsets were doing fairly well as ooposed to my past horrific experiences with VIA chipsets.AMD64's are finally up to par with even the best Intel CPU's now and have decent chipset solutions to boot!Wich makes me wonder why the AMD crowd is still so intent on the need to overclock constantly,expecially given the disadvantages with OC'g vs. the small performance gains.Is it that the AMD crowd is still so geared towards OC'g to match Intel performance(in the past) that they're just caught in a "rut" and seemingly find the need to overclock still a neccessity?
Even without overclocking the higher end AMD64's seem to outperform their Intel counterparts.