|
Going to start a blog about my overlock process from my budget PC that I built. Some of you may remember this thread from Tech Support:
http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=188036
Specs
+ Show Spoiler +
Athlon II X3 450 3.2ghz 'Rana'
Biostar A770E3 MB (770chipset)
MSI GTX 460 768mb 192bit Twin Frozr II
2GB Kingston HyperX 1333mhz 9CL
WD 160GB 7.2RPM 8mb Recertified
Antec Earthwatts 430D
NZXT Gamma
Later on I added:
+2GB more HyperX
4x Yate Loon Mediums
Hyper 212+ HSF
NZXT Sentry 2 Fan controller w/ temp sensors
Initial Build = $350
+ Extra RAM, HSF, x4 YL Fans = +$95
So I don't exactly know what I'm doing, but I've read a million guides. Unfortunately, every guide today about overclocking is either about overclocking Phenom's using only an unlocked multiplier (which is stupid, because a full overclock needs to use the FSB, and you're going to end up lowering the multiplier below stock to use a higher FSB anyways), refers to DDR2 RAM (ie outdated), or uses software instead of bios (read: is retarded). In fact, I've found the best guides to be Intel guides, despite being irrelevant in many ways, they were more comprehensive in general and leased good information here and there that I could use.
So what I basically understand is that a system is composed of 3 equations and 1 memory issue:
FSB x CPU Multiplier
(FSB x CPU_NB Multiplier) > (FSB x CPU_HT Link Speed)
FSB x RAM frequency (not totally correct but similar)
Memory Timings
In short, the FSB dictates things. Memory timings, simply keep at stock to maintain stability, or 'tighten' if you want. Or 'loosen' for stability.
What I have done in my overclock process, is simply raise the FSB as high as I can, and then drop the multipliers of everything else to very low. Now, who knows what my FSB really maxes at, but I've found that 260 is more than enough to tinker away. In fact, my CPU can't handle it's stock multiplier of 16 at a 260 FSB, much 13, unless volting is applied. So 260 is my sweet spot for FSB.
Now, because I don't have a black edition, my CPU voltage, CPU-NB, and RAM are actually locked as well. Fortunately, by raising my FSB so high, this isn't an issue. In fact, it should never be an issue, to anyone, AFAIK. I've found that by lowering my multipliers on everything with a 260 FSB, I've found 'stock' values for my HT Link, CPUNB, and RAM. So it's a process of slowly raising my CPU Multiplier up.
It's also crucial I have my 4th core unlocked, as unless I'm able to hit over 4ghz, which is unlikely given I want to avoid major overvolting and stay on air cooling, 4 cores is better than 3. I've also found my 4th core is pretty stable, and that my 3 core limit is the same as my 4 core limit, and vice versa. So.
I'm easily willing to do a +1 voltage increase offset (remember I have a locked CPU, so I must use my motherboard for this) and found my limit is between 260 x 13.5 and 260 x 14, or 3.51ghz and 3.63 ghz. When I lowered my CPU voltage by .5, and then raised my Mtoerhbard CPU offset to +2 (a way of overvolting when my CPU won't allow it due to being locked) I am now on 3.77 ghz (please I hope my system doesn't crash while writing this LOL).
I probably should've started this blog earlier, but oh well. here's my CPU validation for 3.63 ghz, i was stable here and ran for about 7 hours on prime95 blend torture test. I'm currently typing this out on a +.5 voltage with 3.77ghz, and see where I can go with this. i don't really want to hit 1.55voltage, but 1.5 is okay (of note, my CPU-Z says 1.488 but bios says 1.502).
Here's where prime95 was stable:
http://valid.canardpc.com/show_oc.php?id=1694085
here''s where I am now, and will continue upping my multiplier until I crash:
http://valid.canardpc.com/show_oc.php?id=1694810
Since I can't do multipliers, my Bios actually allows me to tinker with speeds, such as listing my HT LinK Speed as 1.6, 1.8, or 2 - with an increase in FSB, these are essentially ways to tinker with my multiplier. I have this in bios:
HT Link Speed: 1.2ghz // 16bit
DRAM 'Limit' 1066mhz
Timings: 9-9-9-24-33-4 with everything else on Auto, on "both"
CPU-NB 1600mhz
ACC Per Core 0.0.0.+6% (did this for the unlocked core, probably unnecessary, will go back to 0 once I find limit, unless I find it's needed)
CPU +2 voltage
CPU_VID 1.35 from 1.4 (so with offset this is 1.5 vid essentially)
CPU Multiplier is 14 right now
Will keep this updated.
|
So I've been messing around, it seems my limit between 3.64ghz and 3.77 (the above post probably shows 3.77 is stable enough for browsing, but not for cinebench benchmark). I've been running Cinebench CPU test as a quick 1 minute benchmark, as I've noticed a lot of my overclocks will crash when I run it, usually a second after I but the button, but sometimes about 6 seconds into the test.
Anyways, given that 3.77 is my limit, what I did was divide 3.77 ghz by 14 (as I figured 3.77 as a limit by doing 260x14.5). So, my limit with a 14 multiplier is between 260 and 269.28 FSB. I started testing 269, 268, 267... and at 267, at boot the screen showed "Too Many Cold Reset due Bios Post. System might be incorrectly overkclocked [sic]. Press DEL to resume.
It went into BIOS, and I simply lowered the FSB to 266 (probably would've crashed anyways, and at 266x14 I'm sure I'll crash after I post this and run cinebench). I don't think my motherboard is limiting me - true I raised everything, the HT link, the memory, the NB, by about 10mhz by going to 270 FSB, but I doubt that it's enough to make an impact, considering my CPU limits are right abouts there, and 260FSB is roughly stock settings, give or take (HT link slightly lower, NB slightly higher, RAM slightly higher).
just wondering what that was all about. Hope I'm not doing undue stress by repeatedly crashing the system o_O
|
Be thankful you can overclock at all... Whenever I try my computer just shuts down. Even if it's just increasing my multiplier by one.
|
On March 06 2011 19:54 StallingHard wrote:
Be thankful you can overclock at all... Whenever I try my computer just shuts down. Even if it's just increasing my multiplier by one.
You sure you've upped the voltages?
I couldn't get my 4th core working or any unclocks at all without raising the voltages a bit on my phenom II x2 555 BE.
Had to settle at slight overclock around 3.5 Ghz cause my motherboard and cooling is trash ATM and I don't think it can take it.
|
Be thankful you can overclock at all... Whenever I try my computer just shuts down. Even if it's just increasing my multiplier by one.
System specs, what did you try to do? If your FSB is 200, that means an increase in 1 on your multiplier is actually a pretty big jump. I'm not surprised it shuts down - assuming this is how the story goes. You may be better off by raising your FSB and then lowering the multiplier, for a net gain of maybe 50mhz, at first. I went straight ahead and upped vcore by +.1, but I really doubt my system would be stable if I simply gave it another 200mhz from stock voltages either.
I couldn't get my 4th core working or any unclocks at all without raising the voltages a bit on my phenom II x2 555 BE.
Had to settle at slight overclock around 3.5 Ghz cause my motherboard and cooling is trash ATM and I don't think it can take it.
Actually, that's a problem I've heard a lot about and surprisngly, few peole know the answer to. On the entire internetz, the answer to this problem is in a single Rebelshaven X3 unlocking guide, very hard to find (not exactly as popular as overclock.net or extremeoverclock, but more useful and 'hardcore' and specific). The solution is lower your HT Link Speed.
I couldn't get an unlock at 200 FSB/stock settings until I lowered my HT Link speed from Auto (which means 2.0ghz) to 1.6ghz. HT Link speed has no impact on the system performance (i'll hold back from saying 'at all' but its pretty insignificant, my understanding is you either have enough or you don't, as long as its above 1.2ghz or so your good).
Also, ACC values let you raise the voltage on each core independently, to help. I haven't had any issues with my 4th core in p95 tests, leading me to believe I probably just have a disabled x4 chip, but there no reason you 4th core is bad. 3.5ghz is a great OC though.
Anyways, back to me me me...
So I tried 269, 268, all the way to 263, and it got steadily and steadily more 'stable' - cinebench would run a few seconds longer until crashing, BSOD crashes became resets... But at 263FSB, was able to run through a complete benc hmark of Cinebench! So I guess my system's limit at 1.502 voltage is 3.682 ghz, although I haven't ran a p95 test yet so I imagine my real system stability is probably just slightly less than that (ie its workable stable, maybe not rock solid 24 hours stable). Anyways, as you can see from this whiny thread:
http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=195906
I am unable to correctly view my temps (all programs say below ambient, but same low ambient temp at same time) but all my temps are still nonetheless below what my system reported with stock cooling and stock settings on load. My point is that temps don't seem to be an issue.
So what I don't really understand, is how voltage comes in to the equation. I sort of understand more voltage, more overclock/stability - so do crazy phase cooling/liquid nitrogen/dry ice setups just run like crazy high voltages and get good overclocks and keep temps low? Because I thought there's a certain 'maximum' limit to how much voltage a chip can take - I mean I can't see it being even theoretically possible you could put a nuclear reactor to an athlon ii so long as you kept it cold, right? Anyways, heat isn't an issue, but I hear over 1.55 is 'unsafe' and I'm already at 1.5, and I absolutely do not want to damage this processor. I understand CPU's are 'tanks', so halving the life just means it only lives to a huge 5 years instead of 10, so I understand I have room to play, but at the same time I want to take care of my system, ya feel? Anyways, I may try a bit more voltage, see where that gets me, but I'm pretty sure 1.5v is about as much as I go as far as big gains per volting.
|
assuming 263x14 and a vcore of 1.502 is where I want to stop, my next step would be to p95 for 10 or so hours (ideally 24, but ill wait until I have cpunb, ram, and ht overclocks settled before that final test), then I would see about overclock/volt on CPU-nb, and then I would probably just leave ram and ht at stock (they dont affect performance, why chance stability on no noticeable gain).
But I'm going to play around with some voltage jumps, maybe even 1.55. Maybe a dangerous thing to do since my temps are inaccurate, but so far my temps are way below stock with stock cooling (yes, the inaccurate temps, but I think they are just falsely low, Im sure they still pick up increases and decreases of heat).
|
so just a quick try of bios=1.6volt // cpu-z and hwmonitor = 1.58volt, temps are still very low, lower than stock cooling on stock settings. 3.81 ghz, something impossible without the extra .08 voltage. gonna try cinebench, see where temps go.
|
crashed on cinebench lol. so clearly 1.58 voltage doesnt net much gain, couldnt do 113mhz increase for an increase of .076v
i'll see where increasing my voltage just .125 increments from 1.504 up to 1.55 does, but i imagine my 3.682 with a 1.504 v is what i'll settle for. it's nice to know temps aren't an issue (i think).
|
T.O.P.
Hong Kong4685 Posts
On March 06 2011 21:00 Belial88 wrote:
So what I don't really understand, is how voltage comes in to the equation. I sort of understand more voltage, more overclock/stability - so do crazy phase cooling/liquid nitrogen/dry ice setups just run like crazy high voltages and get good overclocks and keep temps low? Because I thought there's a certain 'maximum' limit to how much voltage a chip can take - I mean I can't see it being even theoretically possible you could put a nuclear reactor to an athlon ii so long as you kept it cold, right? Anyways, heat isn't an issue, but I hear over 1.55 is 'unsafe' and I'm already at 1.5, and I absolutely do not want to damage this processor. I understand CPU's are 'tanks', so halving the life just means it only lives to a huge 5 years instead of 10, so I understand I have room to play, but at the same time I want to take care of my system, ya feel? Anyways, I may try a bit more voltage, see where that gets me, but I'm pretty sure 1.5v is about as much as I go as far as big gains per volting.
More voltage = more power to the processor. With more power your processor can go faster.
I read on Intel's site before that the power consumption formula is around
Power = (Voltage^2) * (Clock Speed)
|
i5 750
4GB 1600 DDR3
Gigabyte mobo don't know the exact model number
1100W PSU
2x GTX460s in SLI
don't know much else to tell. Thanks for any help that comes of this
|
More voltage = more power to the processor. With more power your processor can go faster.
Actually I know this isn't exactly correct. I'm nub but I have searched, believe me, I wouldn't be posting questions if I couldn't find it elsewhere, part of the reason for this blog.
More voltage means the current increases, or is 'faster'. It means logical 1's are registered easier, whereas in an overclocked yet unstable CPU what's going on is that the electric on/off signals aren't being registered because the signals aren't being sent as fast as the processor is reading. By increasing VCORE, you are making the electric signals faster. An easy analogy is that when you turn on a hose, it doesn't instantly flow, it sort of builds up. In a CPU, data may be read or misread because that buildup should be registered as a 1, but is only registered as 0. In gets complicated when you start to factor in that a voltage signal of 1.5 may be seen as ON, but a clearly ON signal of 1.4 isn't registered as 1 because that signal wasn't fast enough to reach 1.5 before the system logged in a 0 and is waiting for the next piece of data. But that's just semantics, I'm sure that's what you meant 
i5 750
4GB 1600 DDR3
Gigabyte mobo don't know the exact model number
1100W PSU
2x GTX460s in SLI
don't know much else to tell. Thanks for any help that comes of this
What exactly are you trying to tell me?
Anyways, considering my temperatures are okay, why can't I simply go past 1.55 vcore (what is usually recommended on forums as 'safe')? From what I understand, raising voltage does 2 things - increase temperatures, which is horrible, and increases electromigration, which isn't really good but is very minor and won't really be noticeable (voltage/overclocking doesn't kill, heat does - as the saying goes). Then what I don't get, is how are like 6+ghz overclocks achieved? These crazy lab setups, are they like running extreme voltages or something?
I also read, though I can't be sure, that 'voltage isn't everything' and some crazy phase overclock was achieved with 'relatively' low voltages, although who knows what that means. I think the point was that some CPUs go faster when below freezing, but that isn't really practical for me/anyone. So like does everyone with crazy watercooling and stuff just have huge voltages, and only do so because they can keep temps low?
I mean you realize I have a Hyper 212 + in push/pull, 4 more case fans, a 40mm cpu fan mounted onto my northbridge (ghetto style with copper wire, had an issue because hyper 212 isn't blowing air like the stock hsf was onto the nb), as well as a pretty well ventilated case. Now, like I already said, i'm unable to monitor temps correctly since they are reporting below ambient, but I do see my temps are below what was reported when stock cooling w/stock settings (ie they read a low/high of 16-50) and now its 10-35)
|
That was supposed to be a PM rofl. Sorry for going off the road hahahaha
|
pm about what? pm me the answer lol.
yea still dont get the overvolt thing. I clearly see a overvolt of 1.504 w/3.68ghz on unlocked x3 to x4 is best return, as .1v increases won't even net 100mhz now, but why not overvolt more if temperature is the only thing to be worried about?
|
Just a quick thing - most of my crashes are BSOD. However tinkering with higher multi/lower fsb or lower multi/higher fsb generally yielded crash/stability at the same points. Just wondering if it's a NB issue? I hear BSOD is generally NB issue, but my CPU-NB and DRAM speed is about stock, my NB about 104mhz higher at 2104 and ram about 35 mhz faster at 701mhz - also, system tests stable at 260 FSB until i raise multi on CPU..
I mean bsod can be cpu too right? has to be, unless im doing something clueless here. Or maybe higher cpu speeds affect nb, thereby causing crashes, so I need to up voltage / lower speeds on other things while increasing cpu speed? im trying to stay at about stock speed with overclock.
|
It seems there are stability issues 
So i know this is perfectly stable:
![[image loading]](http://valid.canardpc.com/cache/screenshot/1694085.png)
I thought I had 263x14=3.68ghz, 1.504v stable, but it crashed on p95 pretty quickly, and even raising up more voltage didn't really work. Right now still tinkering with more voltage, even lowered HT and NB. To the guy who said they couldn't get more than 200mhz for one more multiplier, yea, I'm not surprised, I'm maxing out voltage by .2 and can't even get a 400 mhz gain. It seems it's a bit hard to overclock.
You really have to max out volts I think to get around the 3.8+ mark, but from what I read 1.55 is the most you'll go - although I'm not sure why people say that, if it's for temps or other reasons.
On an important note, my motherboard has TDP of 95w, and unlocking + overclocking is bringing me over 140w - is this a problem and how so?
|
I'm having a lot of trouble getting above 3.6ghz actually. I think my limit is somewhere between 3.5 and 3.68 ghz irregardless of voltage (unless I start pushing over 1.6v, which I may do but don't fully understand why people say 1.55 is the limit, because if its temps, well, my temps are very good atm!).
|
People generally say 1.55 is the limit for 24/7 use after seeing chips running higher than that degrade or die. It's not so much the temps, which can still be a factor, depending on your cooling solution, but rather the voltage.
How are you measuring that 140 watt? Generally, a motherboard TDP refers to how much power it's designed to cleanly provide to the CPU.
|
Is there a good overclocking guide for beginners using AMD processors? I have an Athlon I want to overclock. I used my motherboard's built in utility and I can get a stable +10% but I never know how much to raise the voltage. I raised the voltage 10% as well (that overclock isn't applied currently) but I don't know how much I need to raise it. Any guides out there that can help a beginner?
|
On March 06 2011 21:00 Belial88 wrote:Show nested quote +I couldn't get my 4th core working or any unclocks at all without raising the voltages a bit on my phenom II x2 555 BE.
Had to settle at slight overclock around 3.5 Ghz cause my motherboard and cooling is trash ATM and I don't think it can take it. Actually, that's a problem I've heard a lot about and surprisngly, few peole know the answer to. On the entire internetz, the answer to this problem is in a single Rebelshaven X3 unlocking guide, very hard to find (not exactly as popular as overclock.net or extremeoverclock, but more useful and 'hardcore' and specific). The solution is lower your HT Link Speed.
If his CPU wasn't getting enough power, whether that is because it had some slightly defective cores or for some other reason, simply lowering the HT link speed wouldn't have helped.
Also, ACC values let you raise the voltage on each core independently, to help.
Outside of its use in unlocking cores, ACC is a pretty mysterious feature, but I've never heard that one. Do you have a source for that?
|
Is there a good overclocking guide for beginners using AMD processors? I have an Athlon I want to overclock. I used my motherboard's built in utility and I can get a stable +10% but I never know how much to raise the voltage. I raised the voltage 10% as well (that overclock isn't applied currently) but I don't know how much I need to raise it. Any guides out there that can help a beginner?
No, there's not. All current AMD guides are either outdated and refer to AM2 or DDR2 RAM, only talk about rich kid Black Edition Multiplier unlock CPUs, or use software (lawl). If you want to learn how to overclock, my suggestion is to look up "belial overclock guide" and read what I've posted on various forums about the subject, and read Intel overclocking guides (you will generally know when and where it differs from AMD, and then search to pick up what to do elsewhere). I may not know everything but you can probably piece together everything from what I've posted. You will have to spend at least 20 hours searching the subject, minimum. It's a long process made longer by lack of any good guides.
If his CPU wasn't getting enough power, whether that is because it had some slightly defective cores or for some other reason, simply lowering the HT link speed wouldn't have helped.
yea probably. my suggestion was simply just that. It's mainly an Athlon II X2/X3 suggestions but may help other CPUs. There's no logic behind it, as far as i can tell, as my HT has been much higher than 1.6 with unlocked via higher FSB and been fine.
Outside of its use in unlocking cores, ACC is a pretty mysterious feature, but I've never heard that one. Do you have a source for that?
AMD actually has a guide of it.
http://sites.amd.com/us/Documents/AMD_Dragon_AM3_AM2_Performance_Tuning_Guide.pdf
Here's an overclock.net thread talking about it.
http://www.overclock.net/amd-bios/596792-acc-value-question.html
But you are right, it's pretty mysterious. It's not really easy to use google to figure out that one. Granted what I said may not be entirely accurate, but the idea is right - if a core is having issues, raise the ACC value on it. May or may not be additional or less voltage, but supposedly it helps by compensating in some way.
Anyways having a LOT of trouble with 3.68 in prime95. I think I was able to get 3.77 running but it would crash upon just opening p95. In fact, I'm having a VERY hard time getting anything in the 3.6 range running prime stable. I tested a high volt 1.55v 3.625ghz build and it crashed a couple hours in prime95, so clearly +400mhz is the upper limits of the Athlon II.
I'm starting to see other people say similar reports
|
Anyways for those that are interested, this is currently the settings I am using in Bios, and right now currently just tinkering my FSB, Multiplier, CPU offset, and CPU_VID. I really like testing by lowering multipliers on everything, raising the FSB a huge leap, and then lowering below stock the CPU multiplier so the net result is a CPU clock gain, and to make sure no matter how high I set my FSB, my other stuff won't be an issue (due to setting their multi's so low). Apparently a lot of stuff is locked, so on my board things like the NB Multiplier is actually just me selecting my NB speed, locked up to 2000mhz, in which case if the FSB is anything but stock, it will result in a tinkered speed. Anyways heres what I'm doing now, I know there isn't a single guide that actually tells you how to mess with your BIos just what your 'supposd' to do so it was kind of confusing at first for me. Also nice to write everything down, if there's soemthing you do just on stock settings, and you need to do a CMOS reset, good to remember what you always do as well as your overclock settings.
also fuond my motherboards limit for FSB is somewhere between 260-270. At 270 it will say corrupt CMOS and I need to hard reset.
MAIN: Floppy Disabled (won't boot OS otherwise, huge headache when first built pc!)
Advanced-CPU Config: Powernow Disabled (Biostar equivalent of CoolnQuiet, I'm going to turn it back on once done overclocking. just makes things clearer when oc'ing)
ACC - Per Core - 0%/0%/0%/0%. 0% on all cores, had no issues with each core in prime95, failures are usually not worker fails but crashes/resets. ACC on because no point in overclocking on 3 cores when I know 4 cores is better and the oc difference, if it exists, isn't worth it. I know my 4th core is perfectly fine though, having same OC results.
Hardware Health - Shutdown 60*C
BOOT DEVICE PRIORITY: 1st SATA WDC (hd), 2nd disabled (no floppy!) Have to make sure you can boot into windows silly
PERFORMANCE: CPU Over Voltage +.2 (this isn't an accurate overvoltage actually, its more like .075. Also, this is a motherboard overvolt, so generally my software like cpu-z may not correctly report my voltages because the V_drop increases - difference between reported bios and software voltage. Since my Athlon II is voltage locked as well as multiplier locked, I need to use the motherboard to overvolt)
CPU FID/VID Control: Core VID: 1.4 Maxed. With my offset, I'm actually overvolting quite a bit.
CORE FID: 13.5 (below stock because FSB is high. I actually think unlocked multi oc'ing is stupid, you have to raise your FSB to get the most out of an overclock anyways so you'll probably be below stock OC)
NB_FID: 1400mhz. (I believe this translate into a 6 or 7 or 8 or something multiplier, because my system reports a NB of 1750 right now. Kept this below stock while I oc my CPU.
NB_VID: stock. I know nb may affect stability, but thats also why I underclocked it so much so it demands less voltage
HT Config: 1.2ghz/16bit
DRAM: "Limit" DDR3-1066 (translate to about a little more than 700mhz dram)
Timing Mode: "Both" 9/1t/9/9/auto/24/33/auto/4/autox5 done twice for each stick. Used stock timings, and then 'auto' for anything that wasn't displayed in bios settings for the RAM. definately affects stability, when I ran timings on auto I had a crash because of it on a stable OC.
cheers
|
So before I was using Cinebench and if it ran, I would deem stable, and then run more tests, and then see where the cinebench limit was, then use p95 for long time. Then, I realized that just running p95 for a minute (let alone launching the application) was a much better way to do a quick stress test. A lot of results I have to throw out, because I didn't realize how important voltage is to overclocking, which is made more confusing by both CPU_VID and Motherboard CPU Over Voltage offset, which is pretty much the basis of overvolting on a locked CPU. Thus, i usually do a combination of lowering CPU VID and raising offset.
I find that even at 1.4 + .02 (which the offset is a bit inaccurate, is slightly less than .01 per +.01) I can't reach 3.6. I ran 3.51 on about 9 hours stable p95, but didn't have voltage written down correctly. Hopefully when I crashed at 1.35+.01, it was because the voltage was diffferent just now. So I'm running 1.4+.01 voltage, at 3.510, p95 right now. I know you shouldn't use programs during p95 testing, but it's better to run a test and browse the internet than no test at all. Once I'm done browsing I'll let p95 run for a long time. Seems to be the max stability I get.
Looking over some results, I don't think i can even reach 3.35 without overvolting. It also seems about +1, or 1.47, is the best voltage to be at, give or take .01 voltage. It's hard to push even 200 mhz on this processor apparently. Temperatures are more than okay though, the problem is stability, as I can't get any stability past 3.5ghz with more than 1.5v, a very high voltage as is. 1.55v is apparently the max I should go.
Which is fine I suppose, 200 mhz should be a noticeable increase. I wish I could get more, but oh well. Unlocking a 4th core is the real beauty in this chip, although I guess I didn't really need to get an aftermarket HSF and 7 fans after all. I guess it'll help to keep things healthy, and maybe when I start overclocking my CPU-NB tommorow, I may get better results. I'll post about that when I start doing that, here.
|
Ah and so I stumble on to a problem: http://www.overclock.net/amd-cpus/943109-why-vrms-big-issue-why-usually.htmlhttp://www.overclock.net/amd-motherboards/946407-amd-motherboard-power-phase-list.htmlbasically, my motherboard has a basic VRM/mofset, meaning I really shouldnt push my TDP on it. I will probably just stick to 3.51ghz - at 1.35+.01=1.44v it doesnt work but at 1.4+.1=1.47 it does. I'm already pushing my motherboard, and I can feel the VRM is about 40-50*C (very hot but just slightly not hot to make me take finger off back of mobo where mofset is). I only have 125w rated board with 3+1 (not even 4+1) with 4 pin CPU power supply, so I should avoid the higher voltages. Given that 1.55+ can't even get me 3.6ghz, I'll just stick with 3.5 at 1.44 v, and maybe even just going a bit slower depending on the voltage needed. I think I'll probably end up settling with a lower voltage around 3.4. But I have not had any issues whatsoever with heat though. Very low temps with hyper 212 and 7 fans. Liek i said, I can't accurately read them (below ambient idle is impossible), they are below what load was on stock cooling stock speed locked core. The problem with my tower heatsink is that it also isnt cooling my northbridge or mofset like my stock hsf was.
Anyways, I plan to take a hacksaw to my stock CPU cooler, make a half and half mix of elmers glue and the thermal paste that came with my hyper 212, and glue a mofset heatsink onto my mofset chipsets. Smart? No. Better than nothing? Gotta be. Totally awesome? Yep.
|
here's a picture of my northbridge fan, as when I got my tower cooler, motherboard components by the Cpu were no longer getting cooled. At the moment, I have 3.510 ghz at 1.456v. I won't run p95 again (i did 8 hours before, but can't do 5 minutes on lower voltage) until I mod some heatsinks onto my Voltage Regulator module. I've learned alot about VRMs, and basically my motherboard has a 3+1 as well as NIKOS mosfets, so that's not really good for overvolting, especially since unlocking goes from 95w to 125w, and then I'm pushing 140w with my overvolt on top. I definately need heatsinks (really i need a better motherboard with better VRM with more phases or dedicated mosfet drivers at least) to continue, so just waiting for the mail - I asked how to make homemade thermal epoxy at overclock.net and someone was nice enough to mail me (erm, assuming its in the mail lol) some thermal tape, so i dont have to use a mix of elmers glue + coolermaster TIM LOL
Here's pics of my northbridge DIY cooling solution.No copper wire is touching the mobo, although it looks like it. It's pretty impossible for it to, as its threaded through the fan holes, as well as the electric tape I put on just in case.
![[image loading]](https://lh3.googleusercontent.com/_Vsbun8_dF5Y/TXf8sC5rafI/AAAAAAAAAiM/iTg4q3kiFe8/s640/IMG_20110305_044357.jpg)
![[image loading]](https://lh5.googleusercontent.com/_Vsbun8_dF5Y/TXf81O8dMQI/AAAAAAAAAiQ/Zvf5bTgsgFo/s640/IMG_20110305_050652.jpg)
![[image loading]](https://lh4.googleusercontent.com/_Vsbun8_dF5Y/TXf84-mVdFI/AAAAAAAAAiU/1-vJHqY8pVk/s640/IMG_20110305_050630.jpg)
|
So while I wait for my fan controller and thermal tape in the mail (sent by a nice, generous person at Overclock.net who was horrified that I would use elmers glue and TIM to put makeshift heatsinks on my VRMs lol), I am going to work on overclocking my RAM now, as I'd rather not push the limits of my CPU/CPUNB until I have some proper cooling heatsinks on my VRM (read: no more prime95 until I get heatsinks).
So, since I hear AMD likes tighter timings without a doubt, and from what I've read tighter timings at lower frequency is always way better, I figured I'd keep my RAM at stock speed (at first), tighten my timings by 1 step for all of them each until I get problems, and then start raising the speed.
Well, there's a lot of mystery timings in my Bios, so I just alter the ones that show up in BIOS as a certain value (at the bottom of Bios ram timings page, it shows my CS, Cas to Ras, the basic timings) and lower them by one, leaving the rest as Auto (This covers my Cas Latency, ras precharge, cas to ras, cycle times, and command rate). Well, I tried 6/6/6/21/30/1T/ and when applying changes, screen wouldnt boot at all. After a hard reset, the system would show everything reverted to stock and a bad checksum - I tried it by upping the vdimm voltage from 1.6 to 1.65, no luck.
So it looks like my timings are going to be 7/7/7/22/31/1T, and from here I'll change the speed of my RAM. I would go crazy trying to alter each individual timing on its own (ie a mix of 7 and 6) so I'm just going to up the speed now. I could drop my speed below stock, but well, that would just be way too much to deal with for nothing anyways. Timings are the biggest thing, and having dropped them from my stock 9 is a big enough deal.
For stability testing, I just run HyperPi@32m. I'm pretty confused on how exactly to test RAM stability and benchmarking, so I just hope I'm increasing system performance lol. I haer memtest86 isn't thorough, and HCImemtest, I dont understand quite exactly how to figure out how to allocate my RAM for multiple instances in a thorough manner, and it also isn't good for stability testing.
I hear prime95 blend may be the best stability testing, but right now I'm just doing 'quick' stability tests that can be done in under 25 minutes as I tinker my settings to the exact right spot, and then i will do a thorough test.
|
In my bios there is "Memclock Value" or something, and I can choose "Auto, Limit, Manual". Limit says something like it won't exceed a certain value, and Manual says it will be this value regardless - the value being my choice in an option right below of DDR3-800, 1066, 1333, or 1600 (note my RAM is Kingston HyperX Blu DDR3 1333mhz CL9 2gb x 2). I'm not really sure of the choices, but I do know that I usually pick "Limit" and it seems to have a certain affect with FSB - ie 200FSB plus "Limit" of 1333 means 667x2=1333 RAM speed, 260FSB+ 1066 = 693x2=1386mhz.
So when I choose "Manual" things never work, but whatever, because its all about speed and CPU-Z is showing me my speed changes. So I stick with Limit.
I choose 1333mhz, and lower the multiplier to everything (CPU, NB, HT) to stock or less. Then, I choose 210FSB - I get 700mhzx2=1400mhz RAM speed. Seems to work. When I choose 220FSB, which I have no idea what the equation is, and therefore what speed is equals, the PC won't boot right at all (usually reset takes long and then everything has reverted to defaults in bios and checksum is bad) - it lets me know pretty quickly it doesn't work. So obviously over around 700 mhz is bad. Maybe its a lot over it, maybe a little, I just know 210=700 works and 220=??? doesn't, which is the next step up. I also tried raising voltage from 1.6 to 1.65, no luck.
My point being, is that I won't overclock the speed lol. My current CPU overclock settings are 260x13.5, which, with DDR3-1066 RAM 'Limit', is 693mhz DRAM speed - pretty darn close to 700mhz. The fact I tightened by timings, each one, by 2, is pretty cool, and would be more than I could ever gain than from overclocking speed, as apparently AMD systems love tighter timings.
On another note, I just received in the mail, the thermal tape from the friendly donor at overclock.net, so I will be sawing my stock CPU HSF into tiny pieces, taping them to my VRM, and then be happy and post pics!
|
I'm surprised there aren't more OC SC2ers willing to share some info.
|
So I think I may have a few stability issues? Every once in a while, while logging on to windows with the circle, the system will freeze. Last night I did run a 12 hour prime95, but I have no clue if I did it correctly as the system went to sleep, so it's possible I simply ran like 30 minutes worth (yea im dumb). And today I had the first crash on SC2 (even though crysis 2 demo ran fine) -a BSOD "memory management 0x0000001a" error - although, after downloading BlueScreenView, it's the only BSOD that reads as memory management issue.
My guess is either memory timings, or that GPU overclock (although just to be ridiculous about 10 minutes ago, I tried an OC of 750 to 900 and had no stability test issues on MSI Kombustor utility). Since I've had BSOD's and crashes from memory timings (come to think of it, i think most were boot/checksum issues not BSOD) and none of them had memory management.... I dunno what happened.
Anyways, I think my GPU is limiting my system. I noticed that leaving my GPU at stock settings, and then going for a crazy 900mhz, 1950mhz, insane overclock on the GPU that borders on being stupid and dangerous to do, there isn't a single fps increase in my GPU tests - it's still an average of 25fps. I'm thinking there's no reason to overclock my GPU, as my 3.5ghz X4 Athlon II is 'bottlenecking' it.
:O
|
heres me applying thermal tape sent by a friend at overclock.net, theonedub!
![[image loading]](https://lh4.googleusercontent.com/_Vsbun8_dF5Y/TX-UvwThfMI/AAAAAAAAAjQ/Z8o_aJHYhpw/s640/IMG_20110315_052543.jpg)
Here's where I sawed an AM2 stock heatsink (i was going to use my stock am3 from my athlon ii but I traded heatsinks with roommate with the pc he's borrowing lol). Awesome job!
![[image loading]](https://lh6.googleusercontent.com/_Vsbun8_dF5Y/TX-UXdp5uHI/AAAAAAAAAiw/62rA8SJMMWg/s640/IMG_20110315_052554.jpg)
![[image loading]](https://lh5.googleusercontent.com/_Vsbun8_dF5Y/TX-UXmRXvNI/AAAAAAAAAi0/5mrHC_xOkQc/s640/IMG_20110315_052610.jpg)
Slapped on the heatsink
![[image loading]](https://lh5.googleusercontent.com/_Vsbun8_dF5Y/TX-UXzEyq9I/AAAAAAAAAi4/-eBA-7QcmA4/s640/IMG_20110315_053914.jpg)
Finished! Note the stock fan jerryrigged with copper wire (wrapped with electric tape so it won't make a shocking connection anywhere important) on my northbridge that was necessary when I went from radial stock hsf to tower cooling.
![[image loading]](https://lh5.googleusercontent.com/_Vsbun8_dF5Y/TX-UsZCQmgI/AAAAAAAAAi8/9uTvXh1tuYA/s640/IMG_20110315_064932.jpg)
i had some really hard times with the temp sensors, in the end, I put the sensors from my new NZXT Sentry 2 fan controller I installed today and put 1 on the side of the heatsink with thermal tape, and one simply stuck inside the fins.
The back of my motherboard still feels hot from them, but I hope this will go a long way in improving the temps on my mosfets!
|
So i will begin long stability tests now! I think my setup is stable but not 100% stable, as my PC has crashed once or twice - once during sc2 during stupid gpu overclock and one time on prime95 test about an hour in. I am thinking it's the RAM as thats the only thing that's really changed - that or my northbridge.
I think my CPU bottlenecks my GPU, so there's no point in overclocking my GPU. I think my next step is 24 hour testing with my current setup, see if its okay, if those were freak crashes, or if I should drop my timings. I seem stable enough, but maybe not 100% stable. Afterwards, I don't think I really need to test because everything seems stable enough now, so my RAM timings loosened by a step should be fine (bringing it to CL8/8/8/23/32 instead of CL7/7/7/22/31). If loosening it required, I will try to see what kind of speed increase I can get by first increasing the multiplier, and if that doesn't work, I'll lower my FSB, raise my ram multiplier, and then achieve my 3.5 overclock with a higher multi/lower fsb as opposed to higher fsb/lower multi as I'm doing now.
Then, I would move on to my northbridge. Just a simple "does x9 work? does x10 work?" and see what I can get, and I'll be done!
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
