Venice 3000+ overclocking

[asintu]

I have a Venice 3000+ at 200x9=1.8Ghz with 1000Mhz HT (MSI Neo2 Platinum with nforce3 ultra)
What can I take it up to max with stock cooling?
How should I go about it?

 

[o1die]

I drop my memory to 166 and change the cpu fsb to 240. That puts the memory at 200. You should be safe with those settings.

 

[asintu]

Originally posted by: o1die
I drop my memory to 166 and change the cpu fsb to 240. That puts the memory at 200. You should be safe with those settings.

i honestly don't get it

 

[asintu]

Apparently the HT is at 800, not 1000?!

Anyways I've ran a CPU-Z and here's the summary

CPU
------
64 3000+ Venice, 90nm
Core Voltage: 1.4
Stepping: 0
Revision DH-E3
Core speed: 1808.9Mhz
Multiplier: x9
Bus speed: 201Mhz
HT Link: 804Mhz

Memory
---------
DRAM Frequency: 201Mhz
CAS latency: 3 clocks

SPD
-----
PC 3200 (200MHZ) Kingston (ValueRam)
Timings Table: 133MHz (CAS 2.0), 166MHZ (CAS 2.5), 200MHZ (CAS 3.0) and voltage same for all three at 2.5V



Upon further reading I see that max. temperature for this should be about 67C
I also saw that this operates at 67W..and the highest one that operates at this power is the 3500+ which is at 2.2GHZ...so I'm guessing 2.2GHZ would be a safe overclock?!

So now what's my best route to overclocking it?

 

[asintu]

Originally posted by: asintu
Apparently the HT is at 800, not 1000?!

Anyways I've ran a CPU-Z and here's the summary

CPU
------
64 3000+ Venice, 90nm
Core Voltage: 1.4
Stepping: 0
Revision DH-E3
Core speed: 1808.9Mhz
Multiplier: x9
Bus speed: 201Mhz
HT Link: 804Mhz

Memory
---------
DRAM Frequency: 201Mhz
CAS latency: 3 clocks

SPD
-----
PC 3200 (200MHZ) Kingston (ValueRam)
Timings Table: 133MHz (CAS 2.0), 166MHZ (CAS 2.5), 200MHZ (CAS 3.0) and voltage same for all three at 2.5V


Upon further reading I see that max. temperature for this should be about 67C
I also saw that this operates at 67W..and the highest one that operates at this power is the 3500+ which is at 2.2GHZ...so I'm guessing 2.2GHZ would be a safe overclock?!

So now what's my best route to overclocking it?

 

[happy medium]

This should help

http://forum.abit-usa.com/showthread.php?t=74028Quote

 

[GundamF91]

I used to have a similar system, Athlon 64 Venice 3200+. I bet yours is Socket 754, and as such, HT Link is only 800mhz, not 1000mhz like on socket 939/AM2.

I don't have the same board though, so the key is whether your board can lock down your graphics (AGP/PCIe) down to 100mhz, and also lock your IDE down as well. Because if your board increases graphics and IDE speed along with HT Link, then you'll run into instability once you exceed 10% of the speed, ie. HT Link 880mhz (Bus 220mhz). I also had 1GB Crucial DDR400/PC3200 RAM. It's good RAM, but my board links bus speed with AGP and IDE, and I was never able to raise bus speed beyond 220mhz. My Venice 3200+ (ADA3200AIO4BX) had a 11x multiplier, so that meant it's about 2.4Ghz at top stable speed. Which is not bad, about 10% overclock.

My recommendation is to run it as is, because 200mhz increase on single core Athlon64 really isn't going to get you very far, you might as well not stress the rest of the components unless you just absolutely need the last bit of speed out of this machine. You do run the risk of instability or even data loss due to IDE issues (if your board increase IDS speed along with bus speed). Or you can do what I did, sold my socket 754 system, and used the funds to build this great Intel Core2Duo system. I've overclocked it 50%, to 3.3Ghz, and it's dual core, so everything feels much faster than the Athlon 64 Venice, no matter what mhz it had.

 

[Marty502]

Numbers do vary from chip to chip. I have a Venice 3000 too, though mine is a Socket 939.

Some chips fail at anything over 2.2 Ghz, others can scratch 3 Ghz and even surpass them. Mine doesn't like anything above 2.5 Ghz; no matter how much voltage I give it, it won't always boot up.

I have an Opteron 180 coming, so no biggie.

 

[asintu]

I have 939.my goal is 2.2ghz...should i just change the multiplier from 9 to 11?

 

[MarcVenice]

Heh, the multiplier isn't unlocked asintu, you'll have to raise the FSB. My 3000+ venice did 2.4ghz with easy, 2.6ghz was a bit rougher though ...

 

[asintu]

weird thing..i have the 939 so the HT should be at 1000Mhz but it's at 800mhz right now with HT multiplier x4...i checked the bios and it can be set up from1x to 5x...should i change it to 5x?

Question:
right now my memory runs at 201Mhz...so if i don't wanna mess around with the memory can i do this?

change the mem clock to 166 and change the FSB to 236 (so that average of 166 and 236 is still 201?!!) and also drop the ht multiplier from it's supposed 5x to 4x?
So this will give me 236x9 = 2124Mhz..so about 18% clock increase.
Is this a good idea?

 

[myocardia]

Originally posted by: asintu
weird thing..i have the 939 so the HT should be at 1000Mhz but it's at 800mhz right now with HT multiplier x4...i checked the bios and it can be set up from1x to 5x...should i change it to 5x?

No, change it to 3x.

Question:
right now my memory runs at 201Mhz...so if i don't wanna mess around with the memory can i do this?

Change your RAM speed to 133 Mhz, and leave the timings alone. Also, raise your vcore to 1.45v in the BIOS. After making those changes, you can start raising your HTT speeds. You should have no problems (assuming your CPU can do it, of course) hitting 2.5-2.6 Ghz with those settings. Of course, you realize that your video card is already much, much slower than your processor, don't you? If this is for gaming (unless it's to use with one of M$'s flight simulators), having a faster CPU isn't going to do you any good whatsoever.

 

[asintu]

Change your RAM speed to 133 Mhz, and leave the timings alone. Also, raise your vcore to 1.45v in the BIOS. After making those changes, you can start raising your HTT speeds. You should have no problems (assuming your CPU can do it, of course) hitting 2.5-2.6 Ghz with those settings. Of course, you realize that your video card is already much, much slower than your processor, don't you? If this is for gaming (unless it's to use with one of M$'s flight simulators), having a faster CPU isn't going to do you any good whatsoever.

I overclocked my 9550 to 350 from 250 as well...20% performance improvement as i can tell.


Anyways, if I aim for 2.5-2.6ghz i'll have to set the ht to 3x, mem to 133 and fsb around 280 or so leaving the memory speed at only 186..which is not very good i guess.

Can i just start with these setting so far?
166 mem, ht x4, fsb of 242 (keeping the memory at 201) and so having 242x9=2.18ghz and 242x4= 968HT

or should i make the ht = 1000 and so 250fsb, but this will increase memory to 208!! not sure if it's safe for my kingston C3 memory.

Also, should I keep the Vcore at 1.4 if i only wanna do the 242-250 fsb?

 

[GuitarDaddy]

I agree with Myo, ht to 3x mem to 133 and see how high you can go.

Memory speed means little performance, and the HT speed means next to nothing.
The performance difference between 180 and 208mhz would barely be measurable

 

[abs0lut3]

Originally posted by: asintu

Change your RAM speed to 133 Mhz, and leave the timings alone. Also, raise your vcore to 1.45v in the BIOS. After making those changes, you can start raising your HTT speeds. You should have no problems (assuming your CPU can do it, of course) hitting 2.5-2.6 Ghz with those settings. Of course, you realize that your video card is already much, much slower than your processor, don't you? If this is for gaming (unless it's to use with one of M$'s flight simulators), having a faster CPU isn't going to do you any good whatsoever.

I overclocked my 9550 to 350 from 250 as well...20% performance improvement as i can tell.


Anyways, if I aim for 2.5-2.6ghz i'll have to set the ht to 3x, mem to 133 and fsb around 280 or so leaving the memory speed at only 186..which is not very good i guess.

Can i just start with these setting so far?
166 mem, ht x4, fsb of 242 (keeping the memory at 201) and so having 242x9=2.18ghz and 242x4= 968HT

or should i make the ht = 1000 and so 250fsb, but this will increase memory to 208!! not sure if it's safe for my kingston C3 memory.

Also, should I keep the Vcore at 1.4 if i only wanna do the 242-250 fsb?

Actually, any memory speed at or below 200 is good which means you are not taxing your memory just your CPU.

IMHO, 280FSB is a bit high for an old CPU. You want to work your way up slowly not instantly.

If the memory sticks are brand new, I would let them sit at CPU FSB 240/242 for up to 72 hours to burn your memory in then change MemFSB to 133 and CPU FSB to 200 then work your way up. You have about 67Mhz to play around with at the beginning and feed incremental voltage when you start losing stability.

I hope that helps

 

[happy medium]

Quote: Of course, you realize that your video card is already much, much slower than your processor, don't you? If this is for gaming (unless it's to use with one of M$'s flight simulators), having a faster CPU isn't going to do you any good whatsoever.

QUOTE: I overclocked my 9550 to 350 from 250 as well...20% performance improvement as i can tell.

What hes trying to say is that you can overclock that cpu all you want but it won't give you any increase in games because your card is way to slow. A stock 3000+ will push 2 9550's easily.

 

[asintu]

Originally posted by: happy medium
Quote: Of course, you realize that your video card is already much, much slower than your processor, don't you? If this is for gaming (unless it's to use with one of M$'s flight simulators), having a faster CPU isn't going to do you any good whatsoever.

QUOTE: I overclocked my 9550 to 350 from 250 as well...20% performance improvement as i can tell.

What hes trying to say is that you can overclock that cpu all you want but it won't give you any increase in games because your card is way to slow. A stock 3000+ will push 2 9550's easily.

i know the video card is a bottle neck but i also have a game that's using 100% cpu all time so that might benefit a bit.

So basically the voltage rule is this? Whenever you lose stability you increase it by a bit?

 

[abs0lut3]

yep

 

[myocardia]

Originally posted by: happy medium

What hes trying to say is that you can overclock that cpu all you want but it won't give you any increase in games because your card is way to slow. A stock 3000+ will push 2 9550's easily.

That's exactly the point I was trying to get across. His CPU is at least twice as fast as his video card, even with the CPU at it's stock speed.

Originally posted by: asintu
i know the video card is a bottle neck but i also have a game that's using 100% cpu all time so that might benefit a bit.

All games use the CPU @ 100% usage, when run on a single-core CPU. It makes zero difference whether that particular game is CPU-bound or not.

So basically the voltage rule is this? Whenever you lose stability you increase it by a bit?

That's correct.

edit: This guide should help answer most of your questions, assuming you know anything about computers.