The Official OC (OverClocking) Thread!

If they did, I would have. 100 dollars is £51. It would be very little less than that to replace the motherboard alone. Also, no matter how hard things get, I'm not sticking an ECS board in my PC.

 

personally, i have had better luck with ECS than ASUS

ECS don't clock well, but since Fry's gives them out for free, i am not complaining

not trying to create a war on this topic again, just voicing my opinion...

-im1992

 

sammorris,

Intel introduced it last July, 1.6GHz with 2MB L2 cache. Whether it ever saw the light of day or not, I don't know. It may well be that the E2140 wound up being that chip with 1/2 the L2 cache. They would both have been Allendales!

im1992,

Consider the possibilities! It's an ECS, and it's from Frys! ROFLMAO!! I bought an ECS MB with a Pentium 4 3.0/800 CPU for $135 back a few years ago. The board wouldn't do anything and I went through the hassle of an exchange only to find out that the MB while claiming (right on the box) Prescot compatibility, it wasn't. Turns out it didn't have support for the 800 fsb! A 2.8/533 proscot would work in it, but not very well!

Best Regards,
Russ

 

Oh I quite agree, everyone has their downs with certain brands, but ECS seem universally poor, far moreso than any other brand, Asus included.

 

Thanks for understanding.

 

imran, could be your FBS voltage was nto set high enough, or NB voltage.

and Russ, im prettty sure its 1.325V stock.

 

Yeah I think they're all 1.325 stock and the limits they can be used in vary, but are usually 0.8-1.45 ish.

 

shaffaaf,

Do you honestly believe that I would answer a question like that without checking first? ROFL!!
http://processorfinder.intel.com/details.aspx?sspec=sla3j

Respectfully,
Russ

 

VID is different to Vcore

VID is the chip datum voltage for stock speeds
the lower the better (be not directly linked to OCability as some 'higher' VID chip clock extremely well)
it is however directly linked to heat produced - lower vid = cooler chip

Vcore is the amount of volts the motherboard is supplying the chip

 

shaffaaf,

VID is essentially the limits! Read here:

While it doesn't say that the CPU's max voltage is 1,5v, in this case it does establish the limit at that point. I wouldn't ever set it that high, but the VID parameters shouldn't allow the voltage to go any higher than 1.5v, thus 1.5v would be the established limit. All this means is that setting the VID to 1.5v will stop any voltage spikes from allowing the voltage to exceed 1.5v to the CPU, therefor not exceeding Intel's spec! It's pretty much a Governor for the CPU, with an established limit of 1.5v, so it keeps the CPU Vcore under that voltage.

Best Regards,
Russ

 

i just got the benchies up!

http://www.geocities.com/im19922000

i compared the T5300 with the P4 at 3.75ghz and 4.125ghz...

-im1992

 

what should be the FSB voltage on a 680i?
thanks,
im1992

 

im1992,

It probably is, but the VID limits of the CPU show that it's reasonably safe to go as high as 1.5v and still be within Intel's spec for the chip! I personally wouldn't exceed 1.47v or so!

I'm a bit surprised at the low MIPS score with your 630 3.0/800. Could you post the Memory Bandwidth so we can take a look at it. At the 3.75 speed it's almost 4000 MIPS slower than my 530. Even at 4.125GHz, it's still slower than the 530 by about 3000 MIPS.

Russ

 

Russ,
http://www.geocities.com/im19922000/
i updated everything....also highlighted the clock speed (its scrolled down to where it shows the cpu speed), also, i added the memory benchmarks...
-im1992

 

So I overclocked the E2180 to 3Ghz(didn't try for more) and the 9600GT to 790 core and 2000 memory. I am getting 10745 in 3DMark06.

 

im1992,

You don't need the MultiMedia scores! I'm very surprised to see the difference in processor speeds between the 630 and the 530 at right around the same speed. It's not the memory as that's just about what I would expect to see from both the 530 and 630. I would have thought that the 630 being newer, would perform better.

I'm doubly surprised that the AMD 4000+ single core I had does better at stock 2.4GHz than the 630 does at 3.75GHz, and it's only $40. Oc'd to 2.8GHz it would do a hair (a red one) below 12,000 MIPS on a cheap BioStar TForce MB with on board video and DDR memory! I honestly thought the 630 would out perform the older socket 478, 530!

You'll also notice that the T5300 has a real low memory bandwidth compared to the 630, thanks to it's 533 fsb, yet the processor has enough guts to do pretty well in CPU Math and MultiMedia. Who'd a thunk! LOL!!

BTW check your e-mail!

Best Regards,
Russ

 

I think I made an extra 200 or so marks from the jump from 3Ghz to 3.15 for my CPU - My score with the HD3870 stock was 10,700 and overclocked was 11,500, so the 9600GT is certainly close to the HD3870 - i'd say perhaps between it and the HD3850.
Creaky: I agree with that, but I wasn't going to say anything in case it came out as racist...

 

Yeah and that's just synthetic benchmarks. I say it would probably equal it in real world performance. Of course I could totally be talking out of my ass.