There has been a number of threads this past week about which C1 steppings are good overclockers. I just posted the following in Overclockers.com forum and thought it might prove useful/interesting here to.
I received my 2.4 GHz SL6EF and 512 MHz Kingston HyperX DDRAM yesterday. I also received a new Abit IT7-Max2-Rev2 yesterday. The SL6EF was produced in Maylaysia at the "Q" Fab (Q303...).
INITIAL IMPRESSION
At standard voltage, using the Intel boxed heatsink/fan, PCI fixed at 33MHz, and a 1:1 CPURAM ratio, it appears to be stable at 170MHz FSB (3.06 GHz) but BSODs shortly after starting SETI. Raising the CPURAM ratio to 4:5 causes it to crash with a very loud audio tone as soon as the board is powered up. Raising the FSB to 180 MHZ with a 1:1 ratio also cause it to crash the same way. Right now SETI seems to be running stable with the FSB set at 166 MHz. (2.97 GHz) but CPU core temp is indicating 133 degrees F although room temp is in mid 70s. My early opinion is that this 2.4Ghz chip will run reliably and stably at 2.97GHz, but probably not any faster speed.
I replaced a TH7II with a 2.0 GHz P4 and 125MHz FSB. The memory multiplier was set a 3X and I was using PC-800 Samsung RDDRAM. For this setup I was getting Sandra Memory Bandwidth scores of 2511/2522. Now, with a 170 MHz FSB, the Sandra Memory Bandwidth scores are almost identical at 2541/2551. I was expecting some dramatic improvements in memory performance so this is not only dissapointing but a bit confusing.
Just a reminder to those using XP and simply using the same HDD from the previous configuration. XP does not like a major hardware change, as I described above. I could not get Windows to load due to what appeared to be incompatle IDE drivers. It was necessary to use the original Windows disk and use the "R" repair option (not via the recovery console). It was just like doing a new install but all my desktop icons and personalizations were still there when I got done.
UPDATE
At 166 MHz it ran Prime95 for over two hours without an error. 170 Mhz consistently brings a BSOD when Windows tries to start. At this point I am reasonably certain I am up against limits of both CPU and memory. If I increase the CPURAM ratio to 4:5 it will not post even at 166 MHz. This tells me the DDRAM is complaining because it posts and boots fine at a 1:1 ratio. I tried raising the DRAM voltage from 2.5 to 2.6 volts but this made no difference and I was reluctant to raise it any higher. I LOWERED the CPU core voltage from 1.525 to 1.5 and found this brought on a slight tendnecy to induce the exact BSOD mentioned above. Therefore I suspect 166 MHz is the maximum limit without inducing unacceptable instability.
I hope this proves useful to those of you who are now receiving your new SL6EFs.
I received my 2.4 GHz SL6EF and 512 MHz Kingston HyperX DDRAM yesterday. I also received a new Abit IT7-Max2-Rev2 yesterday. The SL6EF was produced in Maylaysia at the "Q" Fab (Q303...).
INITIAL IMPRESSION
At standard voltage, using the Intel boxed heatsink/fan, PCI fixed at 33MHz, and a 1:1 CPURAM ratio, it appears to be stable at 170MHz FSB (3.06 GHz) but BSODs shortly after starting SETI. Raising the CPURAM ratio to 4:5 causes it to crash with a very loud audio tone as soon as the board is powered up. Raising the FSB to 180 MHZ with a 1:1 ratio also cause it to crash the same way. Right now SETI seems to be running stable with the FSB set at 166 MHz. (2.97 GHz) but CPU core temp is indicating 133 degrees F although room temp is in mid 70s. My early opinion is that this 2.4Ghz chip will run reliably and stably at 2.97GHz, but probably not any faster speed.
I replaced a TH7II with a 2.0 GHz P4 and 125MHz FSB. The memory multiplier was set a 3X and I was using PC-800 Samsung RDDRAM. For this setup I was getting Sandra Memory Bandwidth scores of 2511/2522. Now, with a 170 MHz FSB, the Sandra Memory Bandwidth scores are almost identical at 2541/2551. I was expecting some dramatic improvements in memory performance so this is not only dissapointing but a bit confusing.
Just a reminder to those using XP and simply using the same HDD from the previous configuration. XP does not like a major hardware change, as I described above. I could not get Windows to load due to what appeared to be incompatle IDE drivers. It was necessary to use the original Windows disk and use the "R" repair option (not via the recovery console). It was just like doing a new install but all my desktop icons and personalizations were still there when I got done.
UPDATE
At 166 MHz it ran Prime95 for over two hours without an error. 170 Mhz consistently brings a BSOD when Windows tries to start. At this point I am reasonably certain I am up against limits of both CPU and memory. If I increase the CPURAM ratio to 4:5 it will not post even at 166 MHz. This tells me the DDRAM is complaining because it posts and boots fine at a 1:1 ratio. I tried raising the DRAM voltage from 2.5 to 2.6 volts but this made no difference and I was reluctant to raise it any higher. I LOWERED the CPU core voltage from 1.525 to 1.5 and found this brought on a slight tendnecy to induce the exact BSOD mentioned above. Therefore I suspect 166 MHz is the maximum limit without inducing unacceptable instability.
I hope this proves useful to those of you who are now receiving your new SL6EFs.
Facebook
Twitter