• Announcements

    • HEAVY265

      Attention Soldiers Operation Fury Needs you!   02/20/2020

      Attention All Soldiers, Operation Fury needs you.  You need to choose a side and sign up.  
      For more intel on Operation Fury Please click HERE Please go to Special Event Forum (here), And sign up for allied or axis.
      This will be a CRS Lead event on both sides.  Xoom will be heading up the axis side and Heavy265 will be heading up the Allied side. This will be for bragging rights.
      Why are we asking players to sign up you ask. We are trying for a role play experience.   We want this to be a true realistic event.  
      So get up and sign up and let's make this the best event ever!!!!!!!!!!
      Give me your war cry, grrrrrrrrrrrrr
      Heavy265 **out**
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0
gman13

Overclocking your processor???

51 posts in this topic

My CPU is from MAY 2007. That is ancient in the computer world.

Its still rocking the newest aplications and do well in comparisons with newer CPU's.

I have allways overclocked my CPU's. The first one was a P120 that I overclocked to 150 :D

Overclocking saves money if you do it right :)

My Q6600 is stock 2.4GHz and is now running at 3.8GHz silently aircooled.

WWIIOL runs fine.

If you can follow a guide then you too can try to overclock

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

i dont see anything relating to FSB/Mem ratio (the wiki also mentioned the ratio) in my cmos. here is what my cmos has available:

CPU frequency - minimum is 200 max is 300- i dont remember what the default was, but its currently at 200.

CPU voltage- raise lower in increments of 50mv or 100mv.

memclock mode- if set to auto,speed is based on SPD (no idea what that means).when set to manual, memclock value is enabled for adjustement. it says (in the description on the side) that if i set memclock value to manual, speed will not exceed the specified value. that sounds to me like its taking the place of the ratio thingy.

memclock value- 200-266-333-400-533. default is 200. (the wiki mentioned taking into account the type of memory you have,DDR for a single value DDR2 has double) i assume that means if i have DDR2@800mhz then i want to set it manual to 400 right? and maybe 333 if i want to go higher in CPU speed (since i dont have anything that can change the latency in my cmos)

DRAM timing mode- 2 choices are auto and DCT 0.default is auto.

with my multiplyer at 13.5, FSB speed of 200 yields me 2.7 ghz-temp runs at 55c. i have taken that up as high as 225 yielding 3045mhz with a temp increase to 57c. i ran it that way for an hour or so while playing with no trouble,but i backed it off anyway.

Edited by karu

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

after some googling i found that changing the DRAM timing mode brings up the latency timings. this part is important to me since i skimped on my memory when i bought this upgrade last year. memory was cheap back then and was able to buy some Corsair XMS2 @800mhz, but it is the high latency stuff (like ?-?-?-15) with only the basic heat spreader,it was like $35-$40.cheap. i worry though,that i cant do anything extrememe with it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
There are different ways to overclock and it depends a lot on what cpu you have.

One thing that noone has mentioned so far though is, you WILL need to increase CPU Voltage when you overclock, otherwise it will never be stable. This is something you just have to try out by trial and error to find what works since each cpu handles overclocking and overvolting differently. There is no other approach.

Also remember that it's the increased voltage that primarily adds more heat.

For people that only has the stock HSF there won't be much headroom to overclock until the temp limit is reached so to get the maximum overclock a better third party cooler will be necessary.

not necessarily. genreally speaking, voltage adjustments can be done comepletely independently of clock speed adjustments. In fact, a common theme among laptop users is to overclock while undervolting.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
after some googling i found that changing the DRAM timing mode brings up the latency timings. this part is important to me since i skimped on my memory when i bought this upgrade last year. memory was cheap back then and was able to buy some Corsair XMS2 @800mhz' date=' but it is the high latency stuff (like ?-?-?-15) with only the basic heat spreader,it was like $35-$40.cheap. i worry though,that i cant do anything extrememe with it.[/quote']

you almost always have to manually set your values for your memory

mine was something nuts like 11-11-10-36, when it was supposed to be

8-8-8-24... i'm not sure why when you leave it on auto, it does that on some boards.

you can always force slightly lower values on your memory even the cheap stuff, i picked this G-skill ram since i saw you can still run CL7 @ DDR3-1600, but you've got to force it to do that in the bios.

i bet ur memory to base clock ratio is somewhere in your DRAM timing menu.

One thing that noone has mentioned so far though is, you WILL need to increase CPU Voltage when you overclock,

You need to make DAMN sure your Voltage regulators are actively cooled (have heatsinks attached) before you go about throwing higher voltages at it.

My mainboard didn't come with VR heatsinks, i had to fashion some myself and stick them on

8wwimh.jpg

2mwaxjr.jpg

2qna51g.jpg

dscf5328.jpg

The VR's are the little squares under the heatsink. also called MosFETs (thats the type of regulators they are)

That was partly the reason i was stuck at 3.5Ghz for so long, those VR's just got burning hot if i went past 3.5Ghz (MSi boards have a Auto voltage feature that finds the best voltage for the clock your using)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
not necessarily. genreally speaking' date=' voltage adjustments can be done comepletely independently of clock speed adjustments. In fact, a common theme among laptop users is to overclock while undervolting.[/quote']

I didn't say that it was automatic in any way, of course it's indipendent. My point is that a small overclock might not need a higher voltage for the cpu to be stable, it might even be possible to undervolt it at stock speed and still have a stable system. What I mean is that when you overclock a lot there is no other way to make it stable than to increase cpu voltage a bit as well. It only depends on the quality of the CPU and motherboard how much you need to increase it.

As an example. I could easily raise my Phenom II from 3.4 to 3.7GHz without adjusting the voltage and still have it stable. However, the higher I went after that it just didn't matter how I changed other settings, I needed an increase anyway. To get it 100% stable at 3.9GHz I had to raise it to 1.438V and to get it 100% stable at 4.0GHz I need to set it to at least 1.525V.

Of course this can't be done on any cheap motherboard. It needs to be one that's built for it, an enthusiast board. You can't go as high on a lower end motherboard without modifications like indo suggests. A small voltage increase is probably possible but not a very high one.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I didn't say that it was automatic in any way, of course it's indipendent. My point is that a small overclock might not need a higher voltage for the cpu to be stable, it might even be possible to undervolt it at stock speed and still have a stable system. What I mean is that when you overclock a lot there is no other way to make it stable than to increase cpu voltage a bit as well. It only depends on the quality of the CPU and motherboard how much you need to increase it.

As an example. I could easily raise my Phenom II from 3.4 to 3.7GHz without adjusting the voltage and still have it stable. However, the higher I went after that it just didn't matter how I changed other settings, I needed an increase anyway. To get it 100% stable at 3.9GHz I had to raise it to 1.438V and to get it 100% stable at 4.0GHz I need to set it to at least 1.525V.

Of course this can't be done on any cheap motherboard. It needs to be one that's built for it, an enthusiast board. You can't go as high on a lower end motherboard without modifications like indo suggests. A small voltage increase is probably possible but not a very high one.

Thats all true.

Some of it even boils down to just that particular processor itself.

one X4 955 may only hit 3.5Ghz, while the next 955 off the production line may hit well above 4.4Ghz

its just luck of the draw for the most part. but every processor can be overclocked to a extent.

usually i suggest people see how high of a (stable) overclock they can get with out having to raise the voltage and just leave it there at the stock voltage. usually its a couple hundred extra Mhz you can whip off without needing to get down and dirty with voltage adjustments.

Have to remember, increasing the voltage increases the amount of heat produced, and to a point can shorten the life of the processor.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
after some googling i found that changing the DRAM timing mode brings up the latency timings. this part is important to me since i skimped on my memory when i bought this upgrade last year. memory was cheap back then and was able to buy some Corsair XMS2 @800mhz' date=' but it is the high latency stuff (like ?-?-?-15) with only the basic heat spreader,it was like $35-$40.cheap. i worry though,that i cant do anything extrememe with it.[/quote']

Latency is hardly worth worrying about...

it's the speed of the ram with nearly all the impact

time and time again you can see speed reviews of same ram speeds with low and high latencies and it doesn't amount for more then a few %...problems happen when your ram can't be adjusted for higher speeds when fsb overclocking and NOT from latencies

BTW...usually the HIGH END, HIGH SPEED ram runs vey lose timings(high latencies) because that's what's fastest

Edited by Vampress

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Latency is hardly worth worrying about...

it's the speed of the ram with nearly all the impact

time and time again you can see speed reviews of same ram speeds with low and high latencies and it doesn't amount for more then a few %...problems happen when your ram can't be adjusted for higher speeds when fsb overclocking and NOT from latencies

BTW...usually the HIGH END, HIGH SPEED ram runs vey lose timings(high latencies) because that's what's fastest

I dont have 100% knowledge about memory and its timings, but i was under the assumption that the lower the refresh rate of the memory and the tRAS the better (to a point)

the overall Mhz speed was how fast it can get back and forth

so you want the highest Mhz possible with the lowest latency (delay between charges) possible for the best performance.

but don't hold me to that.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Latency is hardly worth worrying about...

it's the speed of the ram with nearly all the impact

time and time again you can see speed reviews of same ram speeds with low and high latencies and it doesn't amount for more then a few %...problems happen when your ram can't be adjusted for higher speeds when fsb overclocking and NOT from latencies

BTW...usually the HIGH END, HIGH SPEED ram runs vey lose timings(high latencies) because that's what's fastest

That all depends on the rest of the hardware. Higher memory speed isn't necessarily better. This depends on how the CPU handles memory as well. What you're saying might be true for Intel CPU's but it's not for AMD's. AMD's thrive on low latency to such an extent that you can gain more performance by lowering the ram speed a notch and lower latencies as much as possible.

There is no simple truth here because chipsets and other controlling hardware makes a difference as well.

Only way to find out for sure what works best is trial and error. It's just not possible to generalise like this.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
That all depends on the rest of the hardware. Higher memory speed isn't necessarily better. This depends on how the CPU handles memory as well. What you're saying might be true for Intel CPU's but it's not for AMD's. AMD's thrive on low latency to such an extent that you can gain more performance by lowering the ram speed a notch and lower latencies as much as possible.

There is no simple truth here because chipsets and other controlling hardware makes a difference as well.

Only way to find out for sure what works best is trial and error. It's just not possible to generalise like this.

well higher memory speed is KING if your FSB overclocking...your low latencies are for nothing if you can't get the CPU speeds cause your memory wouldn't allow it.

but for a unlocked chip your probably right

AMD and intel chips are all such good overclockers now it's amazing...

I went from 2.8 to 3.3mhz and with more voltage I can likely go higher as 3.4 was stable for hours at a time. this on a amd 720 BE which is a pretty smooth running system from what I had before. Obviously I didn't need to worry about ram speeds.

Edited by Vampress

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

well, im trying 225 FSB clock with a 13.5 multiplyer for a total of 3045mhz. i set the memclock value to 400, CAS to 5 (all other memory timings are still on auto). temp is holding at 57c. we will see how that works.

Edited by karu

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

One thing that applies to all systems. Try to set as many things as possible manually and as few settings as you can on auto.

Use CPU-Z to find out what timings your memory supports and use that as a reference.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
well' date=' im trying 225 FSB clock with a 13.5 multiplyer for a total of 3045mhz. i set the memclock value to 400, CAS to 5 (all other memory timings are still on auto). temp is holding at 57c. we will see how that works.[/quote']

you'll want to stress test the f@#k out of it.

like repeatedly running a benchmark program like 3dmark 2006

or letting ww2ol run for hours on end.

if it'll run ww2ol for hours on end, or go through multiple benchmarks then you know its stable.

just make sure it doesn't surpass 160F~165F to be safe.

134F is a pretty damn good tempature for a overclocked processor.

best o' luck dude.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

hmmm,from what i hear it sounds like i got a good deal last year when i upgraded.

$350 delivered got me an Asus m2n68-am mobo,amd64x2 brisbane@2.7,Corsair xms2 2gb dual channel @800mhz,bfg 9800gtx, 750 watt power supply (i forget the brand).

running at 3045mhz

cpu-57

mobo-36

video card-60 (playclaw has an overlay of gpu temp when playing,it fluctuates between 57 and 60)

Edited by karu

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

now im really confused. i dont have (or at least i didnt) a cpu temperature monitoring program. to check my temp i was using the bios monitor. but to do that i have to reboot.

i decided to see what was available for download and found one that popped up in 2-3 different ads.its called core temp v0.99.6. i ran it and its telling me my cpu temps in realtime,even on the taskbar. its telling me cpu#1 is 42c and cpu #2 46.i check the bios and it says 57. which one can i believe now?.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm confused to what my bottleneck is. First I thought it might have been the CPU, but overclocking to 3.7ghz on my AMD Phenom II X4 955 Black Edition Quad Core didn't seem to help. Then I OC'd my HD 4770 to 900/910 and still nothing. The biggest improvement of frames seemed to be enabling triple buffering with ATI Tray Tools.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Running a my 3.16ghtz Core 2 Duo e8500 at 3.9ghtz with no problems for a huge increase in performance.

Running a cheap kit water cooling system [Thermaltake Pro water 850i] with the radiator mounted under the house [in winter].

CPU has never been cooler. Barely hits 35deg C under load.

Can still get more performance by adding voltage... but that would need more fooling around I don't have time for.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
real temp doesnt support the amd64x2

HWMonitor is a decent program to monitor temps.

With AMD cpu's you shouldn't worry to much about core temps, it's the CPU temp you need to worry about. HWMonitor should be able to show all of them.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I'm confused to what my bottleneck is. First I thought it might have been the CPU' date=' but overclocking to 3.7ghz on my AMD Phenom II X4 955 Black Edition Quad Core didn't seem to help. Then I OC'd my HD 4770 to 900/910 and still nothing. The biggest improvement of frames seemed to be enabling triple buffering with ATI Tray Tools.[/quote']

Make sure you have the latest chipset drivers as well as gfx drivers.

What's your motherboard? What memory do you have and how much of it?

It's all connected. If you're low on memory or if the memory is extremely slow overclocking won't do much.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

lol, now im even more uncertain, downloaded Hmonitor and ran it. i use my video converter to put a load on the cpu (core temp has a cpu load indicator,it says my core#2 runs the converter at 85-90% CPU usage core#1 at about 35%,thats when it says the temps go up, sometimes as high as 62-63). with Hmonitor running right next to it, it told me CPU1 never got over 52 and the core 32.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This is what you need to look at:

hwmon.png

Though, what it's called on your motherboard I don't know, it might be something different.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

ok, core temp monitor is the oddball. i had downloaded the wrong monitor. i downloaded hmonitor instead of hwmonitor. running all three now (doing my converter), hmon and hwmon both say 59 while core temp says 64.

i did just notice, if i expand the hwmonitor window down under the cpu core temp,it shows what the core temp monitor says, 65 degrees for core#0. comapared to what you are showing, im way hotter.

Edited by karu

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.