Overclocking on my beer budget

[Lemon law]

As I also read the Greysky guide, I am not sure if I have this right or not.

"3. Memory
You will need memory that can keep up with your overclocked system. Again, I?m not going to keep a list. You?ll see RAM listed with timings and speeds that I?ll decode for you using the following examples:

DDR2-800 (PC2-6400) 4-4-4-12
DDR2-1066 (PC2-8500) 5-5-5-15


? The first part is self-explanatory (DDR2 memory).
? The number after it is the data transfer rate. Simply divide it by 2 to get the maximum FSB speed for which the module is rated. Example: 800/2 = 400 MHz. Therefore, DDR2-800 can work on systems with a FSB of up to 400 MHz (anything more and you?re lucky). "

So am I correct, given that I now have PC5300 memory, and 5300/2=2650 , meaning that existing memory would keep up with an up to a 265 MHZ front side bus speed. And then given my locked multiplier is 12.5, that in theory I could use a bus speed or 265x12.5 to hit a chip speed of up to 3.3125
GHZ without changing memory or using a memory divider? Or am I missing something here?

 

[Lemon law]

And the other question is directed at people more familiar with my gigabyte G3!M-ES2L mobo, because I now note various fan speed utilities report my cpu fan speed is sub 1000 RPM. On the plus side, I can barely hear the fan run, but why is it I think a higher fan speed would reduce CPU temps without bothering noise. Even when prime 95 load temps hit 55 C, the fan speed does not throttle up like it should.

 

[Arkaign]

http://www.newegg.com/Product/...x?Item=N82E16835103065

 

[zagood]

Originally posted by: Lemon law
So am I correct, given that I now have PC5300 memory, and 5300/2=2650 , meaning that existing memory would keep up with an up to a 265 MHZ front side bus speed. And then given my locked multiplier is 12.5, that in theory I could use a bus speed or 265x12.5 to hit a chip speed of up to 3.3125 GHZ without changing memory or using a memory divider? Or am I missing something here?

no - this sounds weird I know...but PC-5300 ram runs at DDR 667. Divide by two and you get (approx) 333mhz. Which is why I was recommending 333x9 (3.0ghz) for your overclock.

Check your BIOS fan settings. Max temp may be too high for the fan to ramp up.

 

[Lemon law]

I will try the Zagood suggestion of, "Check your BIOS fan settings. Max temp may be too high for the fan to ramp up."

I have only had the mobo for a whole eight days and I am still on a learning curve. Especially since many days were consumed by simply doing all those missing windows updates between SP2 and now. More fan speed is always cheaper than aftermarket heat sinks and fans I do not yet need.

 

[geokilla]

Zagood, Virtual Larry said that his motherboard doesn't have the 1:1 (2.00) ratio. The lowest is 2.66, which is 3:2? Either way, if he runns at 333X9, his RAM would be overclocked. His RAM should be able to operate at above DDR667 just fine though. Just maybe loosen the timings and give it a bit more Vdimm.

 

[zagood]

that...is the stupidest thing I've ever heard. My apologies.

edit: does hitting CTRL+F1 in BIOS allow for more options?

edit again: looks like you can change the multiplier down to 2:3, giving you a max overclock of 222mhz FSB @ DDR2-667 (memory at 333mhz). Using the 12.5 CPU multi that's about 2.8ghz. Still not horrible.

one more time: 4:5 might be available...266fsb:333ram then you could go up to 3.33ghz (12.5*266). Might be rough on the stock cooler.

 

[Lemon law]

Right now I am tabling some of these questions because I have more software to install, but one thing that looks promising is the fact that I can drop the Vcore voltage slightly, run stock or a 10% above fsb, and still get a 10C DROP in CPU load temperatures with no instability. I will have to play with that option more after I get my HDD backed up.

I see on another thread, someone with a similar board and an ro revision E5200 has hit 4.16 ghz, and is pushing for more. Somehow I am not that greedy.

 

[Zap]

Originally posted by: geokilla
Zagood, Virtual Larry said that his motherboard doesn't have the 1:1 (2.00) ratio. The lowest is 2.66, which is 3:2?

The Gigabyte G31 chipset board does have lower ratios, but not for 200MHz FSB chips. Pop an E7X00 or E8X00 in there and the other multipliers become available.

I reviewed an older version of the motherboard here.

Originally posted by: Lemon law
I thank the two responders, but lets cut to the quantification chase, as it is, at zero to boot up, I get through the windows flag screen, my windows welcome screen, and to my opening icon screen in 55 seconds flat, beyond that it takes another 55 seconds to load various needed start up programs before the computer can do any useful work.

In terms of how much speed I could gain, is it possible to detail it in terms of boot up times?

As Arkaign said, it is almost pure drive speeds along with having lots of stuff running on startup.

Why You Absolutely Need an SSD

How about stuff loading in 1/4 the time? That was comparing a "good" SSD (and there is a big difference) with the best desktop hard drive money can buy (VelociRaptor 300GB).

Now, your initial bootup may not be a whole lot faster because there's probably a lot of stuff going on that won't benefit (system POST, loading drivers and initializing Windows) but that 55 seconds to load "various needed start up programs" can be trimmed down quite a bit.

Of course SSDs aren't beer budget items.