plan to OC a 2.4A prescott

[bim27142]

not the zalman's coz it aint available in my country...

thanks!

 

[stevty2889]

thermalright xp-90 or xp-120

 

[aatf510]

Doesn't prescott do terribly under 3.4GHz?
Why would Intel make 2.4GHz preshot in the first place.

 

[clarkey01]

Originally posted by: toattett
Doesn't prescott do terribly under 3.4GHz?
Why would Intel make 2.4GHz preshot in the first place.

For ppl who are skint and dont know what the hell prescott is. I bet you that 2.4 has sold more then all of the K8's combined.

 

[exar333]

yeah, xp-90 or xp-90C would be great choices...xp120 if it fits LOL (thats a big HSF)

 

[BitByBit]

Originally posted by: toattett
Doesn't prescott do terribly under 3.4GHz?
Why would Intel make 2.4GHz preshot in the first place.

It will certainly be faster than Celeron Ds, clock for clock, having 4X the L2 cache.

 

[Zap]

A small percentage of 2.4A chips can make 3.6GHz if you're lucky and with really good cooling. Let me re-emphasize, REALLY good cooling. Most chips will get to 3GHz.

I've had three 2.4A chips (as well as a 3.0E and two Celeron D). I'm never buying a Prescott again after trying out SIX of them.

 

[LTC8K6]

It's for folks who have to have a 533bus chip, I guess. No HT though.

There is also a 2.8A without HT and a 533bus.

I think there are 5 or 6 different 2.8 S478 P4's.

 

[stratman]

What does the 'A' part of the 2.4A prescott mean?

I thought that the letter after designated which generation of P4 it was -- like a 1.8A would be willamette, 2.4C would be northwood, and 2.4E would be prescott.

Can someone clarify this for my ignorant mind?

 

[aatf510]

I am pretty sure the "A" of 2.4A define it as a prescott.

 

[stevty2889]

2.4A means it's a 533mhz FSB prescott, with no hyperthreading. There is also a 2.8A, which is a 533mhz FSB prescott with no hyperthreading. 1.6A-2.2A is a 400mhz FSB northwood. 2.4, 2.8 is 400mhz FSB northwood 2.4B-2.8B is 533mhz FSB northwood. 2.4c-3.4c is 800mhz FSB northwood with HT. 3.06 is 533mhz FSB northwood with hyperthreading. 2.8E-3.4E is socket 478 800mhz FSB prescott with HT. There are too many to keep track of so I may have forgotten some. Lol, there are at least 5 differant socket 478 2.8's.

 

[bim27142]

Originally posted by: Zap
A small percentage of 2.4A chips can make 3.6GHz if you're lucky and with really good cooling. Let me re-emphasize, REALLY good cooling. Most chips will get to 3GHz.

I've had three 2.4A chips (as well as a 3.0E and two Celeron D). I'm never buying a Prescott again after trying out SIX of them.

this is an old rig just bought it second hand and it's quite cheap...

just trying to squeeze out more juices say around 3Ghz perhaps... not a hardcore OC'er though...

 

[bim27142]

Originally posted by: LTC8K6
It's for folks who have to have a 533bus chip, I guess. No HT though.

There is also a 2.8A without HT and a 533bus.

I think there are 5 or 6 different 2.8 S478 P4's.

no HT...

 

[Rock Hydra]

Originally posted by: LTC8K6
It's for folks who have to have a 533bus chip, I guess. No HT though.

There is also a 2.8A without HT and a 533bus.

I think there are 5 or 6 different 2.8 S478 P4's.

Socket 478:
400 FSB Northwood
533 FSB Northwood
533 FSB Prescott
800 FSB Northwood
800 FSB Prescott

Socket 775
800 FSB 1MB
800 FSB 1MB EDB S-Step

That's 7 I can think of offhand.

 

[imported_whatever]

If you are willing to, go with water - Prescotts do MUCH better on water than air. Otherwise, XP-90 (which most tests show performing as well as XP-120)

 

[stevty2889]

Originally posted by: whatever
If you are willing to, go with water - Prescotts do MUCH better on water than air. Otherwise, XP-90 (which most tests show performing as well as XP-120)

If it was a higher end prescott then ya, water cooling might be neccessary, but most water cooling setups are gonna cost more than that 2.4A does, and it doesn't have hyperthreading, so I don't think it would be a worthwhile effort..

 

[bim27142]

Originally posted by: stevty2889

Originally posted by: whatever
If you are willing to, go with water - Prescotts do MUCH better on water than air. Otherwise, XP-90 (which most tests show performing as well as XP-120)

If it was a higher end prescott then ya, water cooling might be neccessary, but most water cooling setups are gonna cost more than that 2.4A does, and it doesn't have hyperthreading, so I don't think it would be a worthwhile effort..

yeah right, this is just a 2.4, and i don't intend to go beyond 3ghz though...

 

[Zap]

Originally posted by: bim27142
this is an old rig just bought it second hand and it's quite cheap...

just trying to squeeze out more juices say around 3Ghz perhaps... not a hardcore OC'er though...

What motherboard is in it? Some people have had good success using mobile Celerons (twice the cache than desktop Celeron = better performance) depending on the motherboard.

 

[bim27142]

Originally posted by: Zap

Originally posted by: bim27142
this is an old rig just bought it second hand and it's quite cheap...

just trying to squeeze out more juices say around 3Ghz perhaps... not a hardcore OC'er though...

What motherboard is in it? Some people have had good success using mobile Celerons (twice the cache than desktop Celeron = better performance) depending on the motherboard.

it's an Asus P4P800-E Deluxe... i've heard some horrors about this board... i hope i won't be able to encounter them too...

 

[trueimage]

i use the stock cooler and i get my 2.4a to 3420 so with better cooling you should get great results, as always tho ymmv.

good luck

 

[Zap]

Originally posted by: bim27142
it's an Asus P4P800-E Deluxe

Had one of those. Works well with non-standard CPUs such as mobile Celerons. One problem the board has is that it has a FSB "hole" at between 160-199MHz FSB. I know the upper limit is 199MHz but I may be wrong on the lower limit. What I mean by a FSB "hole" is that the board won't work at those speeds. If you have a CPU that can POST at 200MHz FSB, lower the FSB to 199 and it no longer POSTs. Keep lowering it until somewhere between 160-170 it starts POSTing again. This makes it difficult to get a good overclock out of CPUs that potentially can hit 200MHz FSB, but doesn't seem stable. For instance, I had a Celeron D 330 that will POST at 4GHz but wasn't stable. The next lower speed it would POST at was somewhere around 3.2-3.3GHz. Nothing in-between. Another Celeron D, a 320 that worked fine at 3.6GHz with a Thermalright XP120 heatsink, changed to a smaller case and couldn't use the heatsink. The smaller heatsink couldn't keep up with the cooling at 3.6GHz, and since it couldn't POST at 3.5, 3.4, 3.3GHz etc., had to run it at around 3.1GHz.