Where to get Conductive SIlver Pen?????

[Guest]

Hey I was thinking about overclocking my new Duron 950 but with that conductive pen that Tom does it with instead of pencil. Does anyone know where to buy it? All I found was this thing at Radio Shack called CircuitWriter Precision Pen - Precision Conductive Ink Dispenser. Does anyone know if that will work?

The link to the product page is:
http://www.radioshack.com/product.asp?catalog_name=CTLG&category_name=CTLG_005_012_000_000&product_id=910-3890

Oh yeah, Tom only shows how to lock in the multipliers. Does anyone know which L1 contacts to short to unlock the CPU so you can adjust the multiplier from the BIOS? Thanks.

-Victor Hsieh

 

[phsstpok]

It should works as long as it can write fine enough. If not, just use it to dispense the conductive paint and use something else to make the traces.

You want to cross all the L1 bridges.

If the look like this.

L1 .::::

Make them look like this.

L1 .||||

<b>We are all beta testers!</b><P ID="edit"><FONT SIZE=-1><EM>Edited by phsstpok on 02/13/02 09:50 PM.</EM></FONT></P>

 

[HonestJhon]

i am pretty sure that is what my friend used to unlock his athlon xp, after filling the xp lazer channels with superglue.
but the conductive pen that they sell at radio shack should work fine...
but yeah, make sure that it draws a line that is as fine as a very sharp pencil.


i wonder how many more of these things radio shack has sold due to the ability to use it to unlock a cpu....lol

btw <A HREF="http://www.radioshack.com/product.asp?catalog_name=CTLG&category_name=CTLG_005_012_000_000&product_id=910-3890
" target="_new">http://www.radioshack.com/product.asp?catalog_name=CTLG&category_name=CTLG_005_012_000_000&product_id=910-3890
</A>

-DAvid

-Live, Learn, then build your own computer!-

 

[Guest]

hey thanks, also I want to run my FSB at 133, I dont want to mess with oc'ing the PCI's and stuff. Have you overclocked before? Can I just like set FSB to like 133, voltage to 1.85 and multiplier to like 5 and just keep raising multiplier until stable??? That way the only variable is the multiplier? Or will 1.85 be too much voltage at first??? I don't know when to start raising voltage. Can I just do that?

-Victor Hsieh

 

[OldBear]

Please read the above. You can not adjust the multiplier unless the
cpu is unlocked.

º º <font color=blue>You get what you pay for. All advice here is free.</font color=blue>

 

[HonestJhon]

and to overclock the fsb is going to overclock everything...
unless you can get it to a point where the pci divider will put it back to stock speeds.


-DAvid

-Live, Learn, then build your own computer!-

 

[Guest]

Umm, I know that the CPU has to be unlocked to mess with the multiplier, thanks anyways. My question was on the best overclocking method itself. WOuld that be a good idea to like set the FSb at 133, voltage at 1.85 and very low multiplier and then just raise the multiplier until I get the highest stable speed?

-Victor Hsieh

 

[phsstpok]

You didn't say what motherboard you have but unless it is a very recent one like the Asus A7N266-E then overclocking the FSB will overclock PCI, AGP, etc. However, all 133 mhz FSB capable motherboards use at least two sets of dividers. At 100 mhz no devices are overclocked and at 133 mhz they aren't either (except the CPU in the case of your Duron). Only if you increase from there, up from 100 and up from 133, then you start to overclock PCI and all. So your OK setting FSB to 133 mhz and multiplier to the minimum value. It will either work or it won't. You may not need to increase core voltage.

The Duron 950 is a Spitfire core. They can all take 1.85 volts if you don't mind reducing its life from 17 years to something like 8 years. Seriously, if you have good cooling 1.85 volts there won't be a problem. My Duron 600 has been at 1007 mhz at 1.91 volts for 14 months running approx 14 x 7.

As for overclocking, I'm not sure you can go much higher. I've heard of people reaching 1200 mhz with the Spitfire but usually with water cooling. With air cooling it would be tough to reach 1100 mhz. Check the CPU database at <A HREF="http://www.overclockers.com" target="_new">www.overclockers.com</A> to learn the average overclock for the 950.

You might want to start overclocking using a 100mhz FSB, finding the highest multiplier that will work, and slowly increasing FSB. This should find the highest overclock that you can obtain. Afterward, you can try at 133mhz FSB and use the number you just achieved as guide for how high you might go. You probably won't reach the same level of overclock at 133mhz but even getting close will give you better performance because memory will be working synchronously with your FSB, at 133 mhz.

Good luck!

<b>We are all beta testers!</b>

 

[Guest]

Wow, thanks for the valuable information. I have an ECS k7s5a but i'm going to ditch it as soon as my Leadtek 735 comes in the mail (should be today). The ECS just doesnt boot every once in awhile and has no oc options so I'm going to give it to my mom.

Yeah I really don't care how high it goes as long as I can get 133 FSB cause that's all that's important to me. I have 256 Mb of Crucial PC2100 so then I can run them together. Any little loss in clock is acceptable. So for the sake of laziness, I'm just doing to do that, set my FSB at 133 and voltage to 1.85 and keep raising my multiplier. I also have a NoiseControl Silverado, that baby costs me like $80 because of freaking import duties.

I have one more question though. You said I might not have to raise my voltage? Won't that let me go higher or is that not necessarily true? In that case, what should I do? Keep raising the multiplier, until it is unstable and then raise the voltage and see if it's stable? then raise the multiplier until it is unstable and then raise the voltage until it is stable? That sounds like a work to me. WOuldn't that be the same as just setting the voltage to 1.85 in the beginning and just raising the multiplier until the highest stable setting? Is it possible that my highest stable setting will run at lower than 1.85? Then shouldn't I just find my highest stable setting at 1.85 and then start lowering my voltage until it is no longer stable? Hmmmm, so many combinations, this goign to take forever.



-Victor Hsieh

 

[phsstpok]

"WOuldn't that be the same as just setting the voltage to 1.85 in the beginning and just raising the multiplier until the highest stable setting?"

That would be true UNLESS the 133mhz bus speed, itself, causes instability. For example if your Duron has trouble with the high FSB and can only do 7*133, 933mhz (slightly below its rated 950 mhz). You might stop there and never learn that same Duron can do 12*100, 1200mhz. This is an extreme example but you would be giving up 267 mhz just to get that faster bus speed. Determining the maximum overclock, at the rated FSB, can be important.

"Is it possible that my highest stable setting will run at lower than 1.85? Then shouldn't I just find my highest stable setting at 1.85 and then start lowering my voltage until it is no longer stable?"

This would work as long as you have adequate CPU cooling. Increasing voltage normally improves stability but it also increases internal temperature. As an example, a 10% increase in voltage means a 10% increase in power consumption which means a 10% increase (at least) in heat production. It can get out of hand because increased temperature increases electrical resistance which in turn causes more heat production etc. Your cooling system must be up to the task. If it's good then the excess heat will be easily absorbed and will remain under control.

Conversely, lowering the voltage will lower the temperature and might actually lower the temperature enough to overclock to that next level.

It can all be a very fine balancing act.

Most likely you will be OK with what you propose. Set the voltage to 1.85, the FSB to 133, and overclock as far as you can stably. When you reach that point you can fine tune. You can bump the FSB 1 mhz at a time. When you reach the highest point, see if you can lower the voltage and still have stability. You just might be able to overclock another mhz or two. I've heard of some people reaching 140mhz FSB with the Spitfire core but it's a pretty rare occurence.

<b>We are all beta testers!</b>

 

[Guest]

Oh wow, thanks for all the information. YOu're so cool. I have been putting up posts for like weeks and not been getting any answers from some people. All these overclockers are so mean to newbies. They like only reply to all the other good overclockers and they talk about insane things like overclocking the XP 1900. he he he.

Anyways. So you think that the differences achieved by FSB speeds of 100 and 133 can be that drastically different? I mean enough to mean a difference? Like even if the overall clock is lower with the 133 FSB, isn't that ultimately faster than a FSB with 100 cause it runs with more bandwidth? You have any idea where higher clock ultimately becomes faster than a 33 mhz increase in FSB with lower clock?

Also do you think it's good idea to increase the FSB past 133? I read about overclocking the PCI buses and stuff and how that causes instability. You think that extra 5 FSB is worth getting unstable? I mean I play a lot of 3d games and stuff and I don't want it to be freezing more. And it sounds little. Am I right in thinking that that extra is negligible compared to the unstability it might cause?

-Victor Hsieh

 

[phsstpok]

I have no idea when total CPU speed and 100mhz bus trades off with lower CPU speed and a 133mhz bus. I think if your Duron works at all at 133mhz then it will probably run happily at 133.33 * 7, 933mhz (just my guess). This will easily outperform the stock speed of 100 * 9.5.

Normally, going 5 mhz over 133 is not even a challenge for overclocking. I don't think any hardware but cheap memory would have a problem with this. However, your problem would be that a Duron is only spec'd to run at 100mhz so at 133mhz you are already well over that. An extra 5 mhz might make a big difference, between success and failure, that is.

If 133mhz doesn't work there is still some overclocking you can try. 10 * 100 or even 10.5 * 100 might work. You can run memory asynchronously, Hst clock + PCI clock. This really does help for a Duron.

<b>We are all beta testers!</b>

 

[Guest]

Why wouldn't a DUron run at 133 FSB? I mean you're turning down the multiplier so the clock speed is still low. Is FSB seperate from the clock speed? Is it another limit on top of the max clock speed that I have to figure out?

Also if I put it to 133 FSB and then like it won't post. I can just clear the CMOS right? LIke I didnt screw up my mobo or my CPU right? I'm scared of that happening. This is a brand new Duron.

Yeah, i don't want to run the memory asynch though. I heard that in some cases, the added latency might actually make it slower than if it was running at 100.

-Victor Hsieh

 

[phsstpok]

"Why wouldn't a DUron run at 133 FSB?"

Because it's a 100 mhz processor not a 133 mhz processor but like I said it will probably work.

I ran my Duron 600 @ 1007 mhz, FSB at 106 mhz and memory @141 mhz. Definitely faster than 100/100 or even 106/106 but it wasn't 33% faster, not even close. Memory benchmarks are about 15% faster. Of course that's with artificial benchmarks. In games I don't think I was seeing even 2% gains but then I only had a Geforce256 SDR at the time.

I had a SDRAM system. (Actually, I still have an SDRAM system, different motherboard and CPU). Maybe the latency penalties are higher with DDR SDRAM. I don't know.

<b>We are all beta testers!</b>