need help on O/C'ing a 633 Celeron

[happyclappy]

I have an Abit BH-6 MB and I bought:

Cerlon 633 socket chip
the MS6905? slocket converter
The golden orb fan
the Artic silver thermal grease

Now I need to know what settings to put on my computer (BIOS - soft menu?) to make it all happen - is there a guide out there to help me?

I am a little nervous about taking the retail fan out and replacing it with what I bought - are there any guides for that aspect of the installation?

Now when I attempt to overclock - what is the first voltage setting or settings that I try?

Thank you for reading this.

-Tom

 

[thermite88]

<< Now when I attempt to overclock - what is the first voltage setting or settings that I try? >>

I have a retail box Celeron 2, 633. It will complete loading W2K at 1.75 volts, but needs 1.85 volts to run stable.

These could be your starting points. You may try up to 1.9 volts to see how high you can push it, but I would not recommend running day in and day out at higher than 1.85 volts.

 

[atomicbomberman]

I agree, any celeron over 600 is a bad oc processor anyway, they ahve a much higher mult. lock, and 6-- to 700 all have a default voltage of 1.65 instead of 1.5 of the 533a/566, I have no clue how it'll do when oc, on &quot;theory&quot; you should be able to bump it up to 950, like up the fsb for the &quot;perfect&quot; jump from 66 to 100mhz, but that usually doesn't happen, it's easily done on 566, but 600+ proved to be very hard. I guess it's just the chip. And be conservative, any voltage pass 1.85 is quite dangerous. 1.9 is ok if you have like alpha + artic silver, but I wouldn't recommend it anyway.

 

[RoadRuner]

you will need to do the ABIT FLASH TRICK and upgrade to the latest bios

 

[fastvideo]

check here:
http//firingsquad.gamers.com/hardware/bh6celeron2/

i have c633 at 950 1.9v. very stable
now trying with turbo enabled in bios, 9.5x103, but i need 2.0v to make it stable.

abit bh6 ss bios at 978.5, vcore 2.0v, taisol hsf, running 3dmark2000 for an hr. now.
128m/pc100,fasttrak66, wd10.2g and quantum9.1g ata66 hd at stripe 0.
old voodoo banshee videocard.

 

[JimMc]

<< I agree, any celeron over 600 is a bad oc processor anyway >>


Disagree. I jsut bought 2 retail 633's from buydotcom, boy are doing 950 as we speak. I used MSI Masters on BH6's with the SS BIOS. One of them is using the Intel HS/F, I had to put an old ALpha on the other one, it would lock up after 10 minutes or so of RC5. Both are running at 1.75v, which is more or less in spec, that's what Intel has fixed the voltage at on high Mhz PIII's.

The 633's may be the 300A's of 2000. A 9.5 multiplier is just about perfect, with good yields I believe a very high percentage will make 950.

 

[soundsation]

JimMc : maybe you've get the new stepping cC0, if it's 1.7 volt for defautl voltage it's mean cC0 stepping.

 

[JimMc]

No these are cb0's, the default voltage is 1.65. I kind of consider 1.75 not much of a voltage overclock because Intel did the same thing with their high Mhz chips. Assuming Intel didn't push it to the limit, I suspect the coppermine core can handle 1.9 or so without too much trouble if you use a good HS/F.

 

[RoadRuner]

yah the cb0 633's like from onvia.com all of the ones i've received work at 1.85V at 950.. don't really clock much over that, however are ROCK solid at 950. The early 533 566 and 600's didn't clock as well, but its pretty much a guarantee that the retail 633's will hit 950.. might have to reach 1.9V but thats not bad, and you have a 3 year warranty on the cpu anyways

 

[soundsation]

What week?
Most celeron before week 30 hard to get 900 MHz, I tried more than 10 celeron 566 and 600 and only the one that I use go for 900 or more, this is week 34, all of them from week 20 to 29 except mine.

 

[The Reaper]

A 633 week 32 cb0 @ 980 here very stable. Stock H/F got me 950 @ 1.85 very stable. The first setting you should try is 1.85. I &quot;heard&quot; the ORB is easy to install. I would place the sloket on a flat surface to install.

 

[JimMc]

Both of mine are also week 32. They came from buycom. I suspect these weeks and later should have a very high rate of hitting 950 with a little voltage bump and perhaps better cooling. Really not bad to eek a little more life out of all those old 300A/BH6 type systems.

 

[squirrel dog]

I have two week 30 cel633's from onvia.com.Both are at 950,one on a bh6(flashed to ss bios on an abit slocket)its at 1.70 vlts,solid as a rock with the standard intel cooler.The other on is on an abit bp6 on a powerleap 370 converter.It too is solid as a rock,at 1.75vlts.I used the powerleap h/s and fan,small as they are.It runs about 10degrees COOLER than the intel h/s fan.These are the cbo p3 cores.

 

[happyclappy]

Hello:

As the originator of this post, I want to thank you for responding to my question. I was clapping happily when my Celeron 633 clocked to 950 at 1.75 volts - no problem - stayed a cool 28 degrees C - I suppose I can even lower the voltage and it would be stable still - will try that tonight.

Having come from a 300 Celeron to 450 Mhz O/C - I noticed that at 950 mhz - the computer is a bit faster but I was disappointed that it was not that fast and I suspect it is because of other components.

I have PC100 - 128MB and also a 133 mhz stick of 128 MB - and I cannot remember the speed of my hard drive - it just seems that it takes almost as long to load things and I can hear the hard drive working to load it all - is the bottleneck the hard drive or the memory - you would think 256 mb would be enough - I ask this because I have seen how fast a gigahertz system opens and loads applications - seems that mine does load programs despite the doubling of CPU power - any suggestions? By the way, very happy with the CPU o/c experiment.

 

[Bad Dude]

When you say the computer does not seem faster much, do you mean doing things in Windows or playing games? It should run much smoother in games. Without games, we do not need all of this high rated speed CPUs. It might be just other components like your HDs or video. Trust me, the games will let you know the difference.

 

[happyclappy]

Hi Bad_Dude:

my game playing is Flight Simulator 2000 - and I upgraded the CPU for that specific game because with the addition of 3rd pary mesh scenery - I was noticing long pauses - the pauses are still there - my frame rates are slightly better but that might be because of my Voodoo3 2000 AGP card being maxed out? in dense scenery I get 20 frames per second and there are still pauses when the mesh scenery changes - I am thinking maybe I need more memory or a fster HD. I do notice a performance improvement but it is not equal to the more than doubling of CPU power - from 450 to 950 mhz.

-Tom

 

[IaPuP]

Flight Sim games generally tax the CPU a lot but if you're using polygon meshed scenery, the V3 2000 likely can't handle it.

It also depends on the resolution.
The V3 2000 would be completely fill-rate saturated at 1024x768 generally and no matter what CPU you put on it, it won't go any faster.

Turn your resolution down or go out and spend $165 and get a Radeon and get some CPU crushing fillrate goodness.

Eric

 

[happyclappy]

that sounds like a very plausible explanation why I am not seeing much higher frame rates. How about this: I notice that the time it takes to load flight sim from the time I click on the shortcut .exe icon to the time I can start a flight has not improved much despite the doubling + of CPU power - I have not measured the time difference but it still seems slow. however, I have seen it load on a 1 gig system and it was noticeably faster, which is what prompted me to update my chip in the first place. I guess I was wondering if CPU power directly impacts loading of applications like it does frame rates or is my HD the bottleneck? I have a Western Digital 5400 RPM, if memory serves correctly, and a 10 GB - bought this during the 300Celeron O/C days of two years ago.

Thanks for the feedback, Tom

 

[squirrel dog]

Up grade the vid. card.I put a matrox ata100 controller in my bh6,and have three ata66 h/d's conn. to it.