Which is best upping the FSB or Multiplier to get the same speed ?

[Nuggs]

Is it better to up the fsb or just the multiplier to get the same speed, And I mean better for the CPU not performance.

 

[sao123]

CPU multipliers are almost always locked...

however its ever overclockers dream to up the FSB and decrease the multiplier.

 

[Nuggs]

ive got the barton 2500 with the multipliers unlocked, but i cannot seem to get a stable overclock upping the fsb but just upping the multiplier to 13 and the voltage to 1.7 and the system is well stable running at 2.16ghz just want to know is this safe ?

 

[bjc112]

Originally posted by: sao123
CPU multipliers are almost always locked...

however its ever overclockers dream to up the FSB and decrease the multiplier.

If it's a Intel Chip then it's locked (excluding those lucky enough with the enginerring sample ) Wing

Most AMD chips "B" in a nForce 2 chipset will be unlocked..

But i agree, it is the overclockers dream to bump the higher FSB, it increases bandwidth a LOT... Especially those running QDR 1000mhz..

 

[sao123]

in order for the best overclocking you want syncronized overclocking.
if you want to up the FSB it may be in your best interest to change the multiplier also.

EXXADURATED EXAMPLE (not possible) ...but apply the theory to your case...

Current P4's run at 3200Mhz (16x multiplier) & 800Mhz FSB (200 quad pumped.)
The next stable FBS would be either 233 (933 effective) or 250 (1000 effective)

In order to have a stable CPU you want it syncronized, and keep it at approx the same speed.
Case 1: 233 FSB, the most stable syncronized CPU's for this speed would run at approx... 3266.
Set the multiplier to 14.

Case 2: 250 FSB, the most stable syncronized CPU's for this speed would run at approx... 3250.
Set the multiplier to 13.

Here we go Steelers, here we go...

Are you really from the area? or just a wannabe fan?
:beer:

 

[jimmyl930]

increasing the fsb will give better performance compared to increasing the multiplier.

 

[bjc112]

Originally posted by: sao123
in order for the best overclocking you want syncronized overclocking.
if you want to up the FSB it may be in your best interest to change the multiplier also.

EXXADURATED EXAMPLE (not possible) ...but apply the theory to your case...

Current P4's run at 3200Mhz (16x multiplier) & 800Mhz FSB (200 quad pumped.)
The next stable FBS would be either 233 (933 effective) or 250 (1000 effective)

In order to have a stable CPU you want it syncronized, and keep it at approx the same speed.
Case 1: 233 FSB, the most stable syncronized CPU's for this speed would run at approx... 3266.
Set the multiplier to 14.

Case 2: 250 FSB, the most stable syncronized CPU's for this speed would run at approx... 3250.
Set the multiplier to 13.

Here we go Steelers, here we go...

Are you really from the area? or just a wannabe fan?
:beer:

Oh my I will be a Steeler fan forever... I just moved from pittsburgh to Phoenix... ( 18yrs in Pitts )

Steelers are tooo hard.



Wannabee ya right..

 

[SparkyJJO]

If it is a choice, up the FSB, but do both if possible too, even faster

 

[FFactory0x]

FSB definitly untill you hit a wall then the multi. The FSB will give your mem bandwidth which is invaluable for gaming and other appz

 

[deadseasquirrel]

IMO, it comes down to memory and motherboard. i've got a kt333 with samsung pc2700. while the memory *might* get to 200fsb, my mobo doesnt have a 1/6 divider so my agp/pci would be way outta spec at anything over 190fsb.

so i decided to play it safe and do both fsb and multi. chip default was 133x11 (XP1700), and i run at 166x13.5 (XP2800).

 

[KF]

>just want to know is this safe ?

Yes.

What is happening is that almost all the CPU is operating at the same frequency and so is at the same stress and temperature. Just the interface to the external electronics is at a different frequency, the front side buss frequency. Running the FSB slower is easier on external circuitry, but neither more nor less damaging. It is easier to maintain a cleaner signal at a lower frequency.

 

[sao123]

What is happening is that almost all the CPU is operating at the same frequency and so is at the same stress and temperature.

Where did you get this from??? He said...

upping the multiplier to 13 and the voltage to 1.7

Any sort of overclocking & voltage raise definately add heat & stress.

>just want to know is this safe ?

Yes.

Not necessarily ...I just read this article at ace's hardware. Increasing the voltage in a CPU could increase your chances of a MB/CPU failure (worst case) by a factor of 10x, if not properly cooled.

Read the article yourself.
http://www.aceshardware.com/