• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

what would you consider stable...

S

Shimmishim

Elite Member
i can apps at 2.0 ghz @ 1.9V with my xp 1700+ but prime95 fails after the 1st run....

i can run prime for 6+ hours at (11 x 175) 1.925 ghz @ 1.85V without any errors...


i can boot into windows and everything at 2.0 ghz, play games and what not....

so which should i run it at?

btw: temps are approximately the same: ~49-50C at 100% load
idles at 42C (these temps are using antec silver and not arctic silver 3)
 
While I consider Prime95 one of THE tests for stability, I often find that for the majority of peoples work, that level of stability is just not needed. What do you use your computer for? Run all the programs you normally use your computer for all at once and see if it crashes after doing that for awhile. If it doesn't, the computer is stable enough for you to use. If it does crash, bring it down a bit.
 
interesting...

nothing too intensive... just gaming, IMing, emails, word processing, mp3s, dvds.... not much encoding or decoding of stuff....
 
Originally posted by: Shimmishim
interesting...

nothing too intensive... just gaming, IMing, emails, word processing, mp3s, dvds.... not much encoding or decoding of stuff....
Click to expand...

Fair enough. Jack it up till it breaks! YAHOOOOO!



😉
 
I agree with DivideBYZero and go with 1.925 @1.85v. It is not worth an occasional crash for the extra 2-3 fps!
 
hehehe...

what about upgrading to a 2100+ and jacking that baby up to 2.3 to 2.4 ghz... worth it? (the extra 400-500 mhz)
 
Originally posted by: Shimmishim
hehehe...

what about upgrading to a 2100+ and jacking that baby up to 2.3 to 2.4 ghz... worth it? (the extra 400-500 mhz)
Click to expand...

If you have the money, go for it. Check the other thread, Michaels already got his to 2.23ghz at 1.675v.
 
Only running Prime95 wasnt enough for me. (I still got BSOD while gamming for a few hours)
(yes ... Prime95 ran fine for 2 days)

I had a great 191FSB on my AMD box ... could run Prime95 and 3dMark at same time too.

But, all of a sudden I got BSOD's while playing Unreal1.

So I re-evaluated my OC. I deceided to run Prime95 and 3dMarks demo looped on non-default with sounds on ... and Boom! .. BSOD.

so ... I backed down to 189 and I ran the above test for 12 hours.

No more Blue Screen of Death while playing my games anymore.
(how irritating)
 
yeah....

well rommelrommel must have gotten some bad a$$ 1700+ ... cuz he got his up to 2300!!!

anyway...

yeah, i should have the money to upgrade to a 2100+ soon... .... then i gotta sell this 1700+ 🙂
 
I know some guys are gonna flame me for this but...if you can run your cpu at 2gig...and it works for Almost everything...its HEAT related....regardless if you only hit high 40's for temps...in my expirience with the XP product...that is too high...get your temps down in the 30's and you will run Prime fine.

Tuff
 
so you say it's a heat issue huh?

well... i'll try some AS3 and see how much that dorps my temps by...

then i'll get a slk-800 with smart fan and see if that helps

thanks!
 
In Win98SE, having IE crash the system once or twice a day was typical - too many windows open I guess. With WinXP, it crashes maybe once or twice a week, depending on what I'm doing to it. Yesterday I was trying to run a TNT2 M64 card in my main system, then use the TV card - lockup every time. Popped in a Geforce 2 and all was well. My Geforce4 was out of the case at the time for a photo shoot.🙂
 
Originally posted by: MrC4
I agree with DivideBYZero and go with 1.925 @1.85v. It is not worth an occasional crash for the extra 2-3 fps!
Click to expand...

Ditto. Crashes (even occasional ones) suck!
 
Stable is computer runs games, SETI, everything, day in day out for weeks without being restarted (or even more)

nothing less.
 
What's stable? No crashes/unexpected restarts EVER! If it crashes even once, I don't consider it stable (either OS or hardware or both). Pretty simple 🙂 BTW, cpuburn is also a good program to see how well you processor/cooling holds up...
 
To me stable is being able to do what I do without it crashing. I could care less if Prime95 can run for 142 hours... if I can play the games I play, rip and burn CD's, and everything else I do with no crashes, freezes, or random reboots, then it's stable.

The only thing I use Prime95 for is testing temps since it put the CPU under 100% load. I might run it for 5 minutes when I first overclock a chip, just so I don't have to start playing a game or something to check for obvious instability... if it runs for 5 minutes with no errors, then I run 3D Mark. If it does that fine, then I run PCMark to compare my overclocking results to my previous scores. If that does fine, then I go ahead and use it as normal... if a program crashes, then I know I need to back down the CPU speed, or RAM timing.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Back
Top