Weird A64 (Neo Platinum) OC problem

jamori

Member
May 6, 2004
98
0
66
Here's my system:
MSI K8N Neo Platinum (nforce3 ultra) [With latest 1.4 BIOS]
A64 3200+ (130nm)
2x512 3500 Mushkin (rated 2-3-3, 2.75V)
160GB SATA Caviar
9800 Pro AIW [doesn't really come into play here, but I figured it should be included as part of the specs]
Zalman CNPS7000A-Copper HSF

This is a system I built for my family at the end of the summer, and I'm home for break now and have a chance to tweak around with it.

So I tested my max RAM o/c; dropped the HT to 2x, multiplier to 6, and the RAM maxed out [prime/superPI stable] (either at rated 2-3-3 or 3-3-3) at 230 MHz, in 1:1 (RAM is rated to 2.75V, running at 2.75). Not quite as high as I was hoping it'd go, but whatever; I can be happy with that.

Next, I went to max out the processor. Dropped the RAM into 1:2, multiplier back up to 10x, left the HT alone at 2. Stable at 2.2GHz; overvolting doesn't increase anything except temps, so I leave that alone. Not too bad. Under load, CPU and case temps are both under 45C

So then I go to combine the settings so to speak. I figure 8x multiplier, 5:6 RAM divider and ~270 FSB will give me close to what I want with no problem (those settings would put me at 225MHz for the ram and 2160MHz CPU. Dropped HT to 3x) . So I start working up to it, starting from 200, going in 5MHz increments and taking a boot as a success (I figured at least until I get above 250 or so).

It boots fine and is stable up to about 230 FSB (this is WITH the lowered multiplier, etc), but anything above that and the BIOS goes into "safe mode", which seems to be "failed OC mode", and drops the FSB back down to 200.

I thought, okay, maybe the hypertransport is getting upset. Even though 270 * 3 would only be 810MHz and should have been fine, I tried dropping to to 2x. It still dropped into safe mode above 230! At that speed with the dividers in place, that was only 1840MHz CPU (~200 MHz UNDERclock), 191 MHz RAM (25 MHz below rated speed), and 460 MHz HT (default is 800).

What's going on?! This just doesn't make any sense at all to me. Anyone have any insight or ideas as to what might be causing this?

On another note, the system doesn't seem to like to reboot when running at anything except 10x200 [even LOWER speeds]. If I reboot by any means (shutdown>reboot in Windows, ctrl-alt-del, or the reboot button) it just hangs after verifying the RAM and says "Detecting IDE Devices..." or some such. However, if I power down the system and cold boot, it boots fine every time. On the other hand, it works fine every time when running at stock 10x200.

Anyway, hope I can get something resolved here. Thanks in advance!

Nick
 

Andres3605

Senior member
Nov 14, 2004
927
0
71
if you want to oc an A64 in 754, DONT USE 2 STICKS OF RAM, its a single channel setup so the oc results are heavily influenced by the use of 1 or 2 sticks of ram.
 

Avalon

Diamond Member
Jul 16, 2001
7,571
178
106
Originally posted by: Andres3605
if you want to oc an A64 in 754, DONT USE 2 STICKS OF RAM, its a single channel setup so the oc results are heavily influenced by the use of 1 or 2 sticks of ram.

You should be able to run two sticks of RAM just fine, even in a single channel board. It will just be single channel. Memory overclockability usually lowers when you add in more sticks. However, I'm not sure his overall overclockability should be effected due to two sticks.
 

jamori

Member
May 6, 2004
98
0
66
Yeah, there's really nothing wrong with using 2 sticks, just maybe a bit lower memory o/c. The 1 GB dimms were just ... substantially more expensive. Either way, my memory clocks to 230, but I can't get anywhere near that when I'm at 8x CPU multiplier and 5:6 divider. In that situation, everything on my board is still UNDERclocked: the RAM, the CPU, and the HT are ALL running under stock and crash, but they're rock stable at 10x200 1:1
 

jamori

Member
May 6, 2004
98
0
66
Quick update on my system ... it's currently running at 10x220 (1:1) prime stable for ~3 hours so far. I don't remember what the HT is at at the moment. I'd still rather be running 270x8 at 5:6, though :-/