My OC....good or bad? any suggestions?

**HorseArcher** · January 06, 2007, 05:14 PM

I followed some guide and I OCd my system a few days ago. Here is what CPU-Z says now:

Oblivion runs much smoother (I got a GF7800GS AGP for card also)
now you can see it there, that I got a Kingston Memory (500MB) squeezed between 2 Corsair memory and it has a lower CAS rating, so I adjusted my PC for the lower CAS.

I also tried to raise the FSB to 235mhz, but that gives me a lock up.

How can I further OC this without lock ups?

**Richard the Lionheart** · January 06, 2007, 05:24 PM

I've been really wanting to overclock my 64 as well, but based on what I've read, the athlon 64s aren't very OC friendly or something, so I haven't done anything yet. :hmmm:

**SweetDreamz** · January 06, 2007, 06:30 PM

Raise the voltage?

**HorseArcher** · January 06, 2007, 06:39 PM

Originally Posted by SweetDreamz

Raise the voltage?

I tried that to 1.5V for the CPU, but still locks up. Should I go higher?

**Richard the Lionheart** · January 06, 2007, 06:48 PM

Originally Posted by Horsearcher

I tried that to 1.5V for the CPU, but still locks up. Should I go higher?

If it locks up, I don't think you should go any higher. You should be careful with overclocking the CPU and voltage settings.

For reference check out this websites about overclocking the 754 platform.

http://www.ocia.net/articles/754oc/754oc.shtml

http://www.short-media.com/review.php?p=1&r=300

You could always find more on Google.

**Incinerate_IV** · January 06, 2007, 09:53 PM

You should take out the Kingston and just leave the 2 Corsair in there, then raise the timings to the highest possible. This should get let the memory go further.

**SPARTAN VI** · January 07, 2007, 04:13 AM

Originally Posted by Incinerate_IV

You should take out the Kingston and just leave the 2 Corsair in there, then raise the timings to the highest possible. This should get let the memory go further.

He should also get better performance out of his memory on top of a better OC. That extra stick of Kingston is probably keeping him from running in dual channel.

**Vanquisher** · January 08, 2007, 04:58 AM

**Maical** · January 08, 2007, 05:07 AM

bump for 1 day old

**UnderdawgIV** · January 06, 2007, 11:56 PM

Have you done stress testing to see if your OC is stable yet? Get Prime95... its free.... run for 12-24 hours... if you pass and your temperatures are alright, you're golden.

**Spart** · January 07, 2007, 02:59 AM

Hey, you have the same cpu

I've gotten to 2,4GHz and it should be pretty stable, haven't done prime yet though. Have you lowered the HTT multiplier adn your memory clocks a bit down?
These 754-sockets are crappy overclockers btw..

**Vanquisher** · January 07, 2007, 03:58 AM

Is the higher the CAS latency the better? What difference does it make? I have a sempron 64 3100+ with 256 l2 cache on a 754skt and i've clocked from 1.80ghz to 2.250ghz

with no problems so far but thats about as far as it goes. Thats with an FSB of 260 from 200 btw. The multiplier is 9.

**OTZ** · January 08, 2007, 05:51 AM

Originally Posted by Vanquisher

Is the higher the CAS latency the better? What difference does it make? I have a sempron 64 3100+ with 256 l2 cache on a 754skt and i've clocked from 1.80ghz to 2.250ghz

with no problems so far but thats about as far as it goes. Thats with an FSB of 260 from 200 btw. The multiplier is 9.

Lower latencies are always better.

**belson** · January 08, 2007, 03:30 PM

The CPU looks good

, but the HT Link and the Memory Frequency are taking a big hit. You should consider something like ~~CPU 328 * 7=2296MHz, HT Link 984MHz(328 * 3), RAM speed 197(3:5 ratio)~~. Wrong, see my other post below.

I don't know if your motherboard even has a 3:5 RAM multiplier; I got this from a script I created specifically for my motherboard. But this is a much much more balanced overclock. It should give overall better performance.

**Vanquisher** · January 09, 2007, 01:29 AM

Pfft, look how much I managed to increase the overclock after I increased the latency

I might even be able to clock it higher

Any tips? What can I do next?

**belson** · January 09, 2007, 04:11 PM

Originally Posted by Vanquisher

Pfft, look how much I managed to increase the overclock after I increased the latency

I might even be able to clock it higher

Any tips? What can I do next?

Is that stable? With an HT Link of over 1000MHz? All the 3100s are limited at a HT Link of 800MHz. If so I bow down to you.

Oh yeah, and what speed RAM do you have, Vanquisher? DDR400?

Which reminds me . . .

Originally Posted by ME

The CPU looks good , but the HT Link and the Memory Frequency are taking a big hit. You should consider something like CPU 328 * 7=2296MHz, HT Link 984MHz(328 * 3), RAM speed 197(3:5 ratio).

I'm an idiot.

I forgot about the HT Link 800 Limit for the skt. 754 (most of them anyways). So my suggestion for Horsearcher is wrong. The best for him might be 383 * 6=2298, 766 (383 * 2), and 192 (0.5) instead.

But most importantly, raising the timings through the roof is not the answer. Timings affect the overall speed of the system about the same (if not more) than the frequency of the RAM. In other words, doubling your timings to gain 10-20MHz more of RAM speed is counter productive. On the other hand, if raising one or two of your timings by 1 gets you 20MHz, then its definitely worth it.

**Vanquisher** · January 09, 2007, 04:46 PM

It's perfectly stable, I've tested it with SIS Sandra. Never knew the HT link was not meant top be that high lol. Yes the memories just some cheap ddr400 i got for £30 lol in 2x 512 sticks that is. It was the increase in the latency that managed the sytem to get stable at such giddy heights

I'll keep taking benchmarks though and keep twiddling with memory timings to see what can get it going best. Heck i'm upgrading to a decent processor soon so what the hell

I've never touched the memory before though so any tips on wich on to do and what the differences actually are would be usefull:

**belson** · January 09, 2007, 05:28 PM

Wow, thats awesome. If I were you I'd try running Prime95 for about 12 hours just to make sure its stable, thats the only one I really trust.

This statement scares me

Originally Posted by Vanquisher

It was the increase in the latency that managed the sytem to get stable at such giddy heights

Your CPU overclock is very good. But DDR400 RAM runs at 200MHz, and cpu-z says that your ram is only running at 170MHz, which means that your ram is actually UNDERclocked. Increasing the timings won't help your cpu speed much at all, it only affects the ram speed.

**HorseArcher** · January 09, 2007, 11:40 PM

Originally Posted by belson

Is that stable? With an HT Link of over 1000MHz? All the 3100s are limited at a HT Link of 800MHz. If so I bow down to you.

Oh yeah, and what speed RAM do you have, Vanquisher? DDR400?

Which reminds me . . .

I'm an idiot.

I forgot about the HT Link 800 Limit for the skt. 754 (most of them anyways). So my suggestion for Horsearcher is wrong. The best for him might be 383 * 6=2298, 766 (383 * 2), and 192 (0.5) instead.

But most importantly, raising the timings through the roof is not the answer. Timings affect the overall speed of the system about the same (if not more) than the frequency of the RAM. In other words, doubling your timings to gain 10-20MHz more of RAM speed is counter productive. On the other hand, if raising one or two of your timings by 1 gets you 20MHz, then its definitely worth it.

thanks! excellent, i'm gonna try this now..

but really, should I take that kingston out? Then i will only have 1GB of RAM instead of 1.5

**HunterKYA** · January 09, 2007, 11:50 PM

I upgraded my processor to an Athlon 64 last year, that by default, runs at 2.2 GHz, but as has been mentioned, they don't OC very well as I can get it up to 2.41 before the computer locks up during restart from BIOS.