Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

why does my 1700+ require underclock?

Tags:
  • CPUs
  • Product
Last response: in CPUs
Share
November 19, 2001 7:43:28 PM

My computer is only stable at a fsb freq. of 100mhz. I have a log below of tensecond intervals before one of the many lockups that I recieve when trying to run at 133mhz fsb. I'm running a 1700+ at 1.1ghz. :-(

+---------------+---------------+----------+------------+------------+------------+------------+------------+------------+------------+------------+------------+------------+------------+
| | | | Sensor 1 | Sensor 2 | Sensor 3 | Core 0 | Core 1 | +3.3 | +5.00 | +12.00 | -12.00 | -5.00 | CPU1 |
+---------------+---------------+----------+------------+------------+------------+------------+------------+------------+------------+------------+------------+------------+------------+
| 11/18/2001 | 10:43:38 PM | 1463 MHz | 12° C | 31° C | 48° C | 1.71 V | 2.50 V | 3.33 V | 5.00 V | 12.04 V | -12.33 V | -5.60 V | 20.43 % |
| 11/18/2001 | 10:43:28 PM | 1463 MHz | 12° C | 31° C | 48° C | 1.71 V | 2.50 V | 3.33 V | 5.03 V | 12.04 V | -12.33 V | -5.60 V | 21.12 % |
| 11/18/2001 | 10:43:18 PM | 1463 MHz | 13° C | 31° C | 48° C | 1.71 V | 2.50 V | 3.33 V | 5.00 V | 12.04 V | -12.33 V | -5.60 V | 20.33 % |
| 11/18/2001 | 10:43:08 PM | 1463 MHz | 12° C | 31° C | 48° C | 1.71 V | 2.50 V | 3.33 V | 5.03 V | 12.04 V | -12.33 V | -5.60 V | 20.32 % |
| 11/18/2001 | 10:42:58 PM | 1463 MHz | 13° C | 31° C | 48° C | 1.71 V | 2.50 V | 3.33 V | 5.03 V | 12.04 V | -12.33 V | -5.60 V | 20.72 % |
| 11/18/2001 | 10:42:48 PM | 1463 MHz | 12° C | 31° C | 48° C | 1.71 V | 2.50 V | 3.33 V | 5.03 V | 12.04 V | -12.33 V | -5.60 V | 20.55 % |
| 11/18/2001 | 10:42:38 PM | 1463 MHz | 12° C | 31° C | 48° C | 1.71 V | 2.50 V | 3.33 V | 5.03 V | 12.04 V | -12.33 V | -5.60 V | 24.62 % |
| 11/18/2001 | 10:42:28 PM | 1463 MHz | 12° C | 31° C | 48° C | 1.71 V | 2.50 V | 3.33 V | 5.03 V | 12.04 V | -12.33 V | -5.60 V | 24.10 % |
| 11/18/2001 | 10:42:18 PM | 1463 MHz | 13° C | 31° C | 48° C | 1.71 V | 2.50 V | 3.33 V | 5.03 V | 12.04 V | -12.33 V | -5.60 V | 21.73 % |
| 11/18/2001 | 10:42:08 PM | 1463 MHz | 12° C | 31° C | 48° C | 1.71 V | 2.50 V | 3.33 V | 5.03 V | 12.04 V | -12.33 V | -5.60 V | 22.02 % |
| 11/18/2001 | 10:41:58 PM | 1463 MHz | 12° C | 31° C | 48° C | 1.71 V | 2.50 V | 3.33 V | 5.03 V | 12.04 V | -12.33 V | -5.60 V | 20.83 % |
| 11/18/2001 | 10:41:48 PM | 1463 MHz | 12° C | 31° C | 48° C | 1.72 V | 2.50 V | 3.33 V | 5.03 V | 12.04 V | -12.33 V | -5.60 V | 22.12 % |
| 11/18/2001 | 10:41:38 PM | 1463 MHz | 13° C | 31° C | 48° C | 1.71 V | 2.50 V | 3.33 V | 5.03 V | 12.04 V | -12.33 V | -5.60 V | 21.12 % |
| 11/18/2001 | 10:41:28 PM | 1463 MHz | 12° C | 31° C | 48° C | 1.71 V | 2.50 V | 3.33 V | 5.03 V | 12.04 V | -12.33 V | -5.60 V | 21.33 % |
| 11/18/2001 | 10:41:18 PM | 1463 MHz | 12° C | 31° C | 48° C | 1.71 V | 2.50 V | 3.33 V | 5.03 V | 12.04 V | -12.33 V | -5.60 V | 21.32 % |
| 11/18/2001 | 10:41:08 PM | 1463 MHz | 12° C | 31° C | 48° C | 1.71 V | 2.50 V | 3.33 V | 5.00 V | 12.04 V | -12.33 V | -5.60 V | 22.23 % |
| 11/18/2001 | 10:40:58 PM | 1463 MHz | 12° C | 31° C | 48° C | 1.69 V | 2.50 V | 3.33 V | 5.03 V | 12.04 V | -12.33 V | -5.60 V | 21.52 % |
| 11/18/2001 | 10:40:48 PM | 1463 MHz | 12° C | 30° C | 48° C | 1.71 V | 2.50 V | 3.33 V | 5.03 V | 12.04 V | -12.33 V | -5.60 V | 21.12 % |
| 11/18/2001 | 10:40:38 PM | 1463 MHz | 12° C | 31° C | 48° C | 1.71 V | 2.50 V | 3.33 V | 5.03 V | 12.04 V | -12.33 V | -5.60 V | 20.83 % |
| 11/18/2001 | 10:40:28 PM | 1463 MHz | 12° C | 31° C | 48° C | 1.71 V | 2.50 V | 3.33 V | 5.03 V | 12.04 V | -12.33 V | -5.60 V | 21.42 % |

My motherboard is a ECS K7SA. My PS is a Antec 300W v.2.02 certified model PP303X. I need help badly.

One question I have is- Is this AMDs fault, is this why the new XP processors are clocked funny like 1.46 instead of just binning them at 1.5 or something orthodox? Because their processors are on the edge internal clock freq? So basically I paid for AMDs version of the P3 which was based off the Pentium Pros (and reached its last leg)?

All I want is this system to work like it should. My power supply isn't complete junk but I've been told it could be at fault.
I was also informed it could be my memory.. if that was it then why can I run the DRAM at 133 and cpu freq at 100 and it becomes stable, just as stable if i run the ram at 100 and cpu at 100. The memory sticks are 2 128mb Micron/Crucial stix.

<b>Someone who knows the answer please reply, I suspect power supply or the CPU itself being of no quality. </b>

I have trouble believing its the CPU because these are made with a small die process (run cooler/reliable) and with the copper process (my last athlon was alum.) and I had absolutely no problems with this PS or system with my Athlon B 700/100fsb.. even when overclocked at 733/133. It made it to 850 stable with only the alpha hs/fan i use still.
The 1ghz run was what killed it. But that processor made me a AMD man :-)

More about : 1700 require underclock

November 19, 2001 7:59:28 PM

I suspect it is your power supply, based on the fact that your 5v rail drops right before the crash. What is your CPU voltage set at (should be 1.75v). That's reading as 1.71v thoughout, which could be a bad BIOS setting or bad power supply.

<font color=orange>Quarter</font color=orange> <font color=blue>Pounder</font color=blue> <font color=orange>Inside</font color=orange>
November 19, 2001 8:12:06 PM

The motherboard is flashed to the newest bios.
In the bios it has a CPU Plug and Play tab which only allows me to watch the voltages and set two things, DRAM freqency and CPU (fsb) frequency.

The 1.75 volt line was jumping between 1.744 and 1.76
Related resources
November 19, 2001 8:17:20 PM

If it's only stable at 100MHz then your problem is probably your RAM!!!

Quote:

One question I have is- Is this AMDs fault, is this why the new XP processors are clocked funny like 1.46 instead of just binning them at 1.5 or something orthodox? Because their processors are on the edge internal clock freq? So basically I paid for AMDs version of the P3 which was based off the Pentium Pros (and reached its last leg)?

The Athlon XP is not based on the Pentium 3 or the Pentium Pro!!! The Athlon is a unique architechure designed by AMD know as the K7 which was originally released in 1999. The Athlon XP runs at 1.46GHz (an example for the Athlon XP 1700+) because it runs on a double-pumped 133MHz bus with a specific mulitiplier, 11, in your case. The multipliers only go up by .5 increments so 1.5GHz exactly is impossible unless you overclock/underclock your FSB.

Finally, the Athlon XP is not even comparable to the P3. As you can see, the latest Athlon XPs beat Intel's flagship 2GHz P4 in most tasks.

Also if AMDMeltdown, Fugger or Intel_inside post in this thread, ignore them because they'll just take advantage of your situation and insult you (and AMD).

AMD technology + Intel technology = Intel/AMD Pentathlon IV; the <b>ULTIMATE</b> PC processor
November 19, 2001 8:36:11 PM

Quote:
| 11/18/2001 | 10:43:38 PM | 1463 MHz | 12° C | 31° C | 48° C | 1.71 V | 2.50 V | 3.33 V | 5.00 V | 12.04 V | -12.33 V | -5.60 V | 20.43 % |


Unless I'm looking at the wrong one, it shows 1.71 V.

<font color=orange>Quarter</font color=orange> <font color=blue>Pounder</font color=blue> <font color=orange>Inside</font color=orange>
November 19, 2001 9:27:52 PM

My ram is running at 133 and the system is stable. The cpu freq is what makes the system unstable @133. You can run the memory at 133 without the FSB being 133 correct?

I'm not saying anything about the performance of the P3 vs. a Athlon or saying the Athlon was developed from it.

My point was that intel used the pentium pro architechure thru to the P3. It was improved upon and changed but the whole architechure was not scrapped and a whole new one was not designed until the P4. This is a controversial topic, not one I want to get into. But it is true that the P3 is nothing but the evolution of much of the Pentium Pro.

This is because they didn't need extreme changes until AMD threw down with that overpriced company.

I agree, for the money.. the P4 is junk. If the prices lower then that won't be the case but at the prices they are at now they've outpriced themselves. How many people that build their own computer use Intel..? Intel is for people who aren't informed.

Don't worry, I read toms/anandtech and virtually every hardware enthusist (including tom and anand himself), isnt sympanthetic with poor performing and expensive intel chips. yet some say these men are biased... riiiight. They are biased until intel gets #1.

I wrote this post for information on my problem, I wouldn't look kindly at a waste of bandwidth from one of those guys if they just want to insult people. I suggest they go to the Other/Opinions area.
November 19, 2001 9:30:07 PM

No I'm sorry. I am not very good with explaining myself.

I meant in the bios it shows those (1.744/1.76) voltages, I've had a couple people misunderstand what I try to get across in my posts.. my confusion :-P
November 19, 2001 9:32:41 PM

Well, your monitoring software (what was it, BTW?), is showing it at 1.71, which is cause for worry. I'd say definitely try a different PSU, if you can.

<font color=orange>Quarter</font color=orange> <font color=blue>Pounder</font color=blue> <font color=orange>Inside</font color=orange>
November 19, 2001 9:43:58 PM

Motherboard Monitor. I'm going to order a Enermax EG365P-VE. Its certified for 1900+ so I hope it fixes my problem.
November 19, 2001 9:47:42 PM

Let's hope.

<font color=orange>Quarter</font color=orange> <font color=blue>Pounder</font color=blue> <font color=orange>Inside</font color=orange>
November 19, 2001 10:10:56 PM

hmm, sorry, I missed that point in your original post. If it's not the RAM then it's the motherboard or the PSU. But your PSU seems ok, so I'm thinking it's probably the motherboard. It could only be the processor if you don't have a HSF attached properly.

AMD technology + Intel technology = Intel/AMD Pentathlon IV; the <b>ULTIMATE</b> PC processor
November 20, 2001 12:01:40 AM

I don't know Jack, but I would agree, I would say the mother board also.

defrage is child's play-fdisk
November 20, 2001 12:26:03 AM

the reason why you hae got a 1463Mhz processor is cauz the way the mhz is obtained.
133mhz system bus multiplied by its multiplier, in your case 11.
133.3x11 = 1466.
even then the timing isnt perfectly spot on 133.3Mhz, i know asus boards are set slightly higher than 133.3, so that 1200mhz (9x133) gives 1209.
and even using different software you will get slight variations.


overall though, the current range of XP processors run off a 133.3Mhz system bus, so with the minimal multiplier step of 0.5 the processor speeds increase in steps of 66.6mhz
i.e. 1333,1400,1466,1533,1600,1666
same thing with the late pentium3's on the 133mhz system bus.
the p4 runs off a 100mhz system bus (quad pumped thou), so it increases in steps of 100mhz

Why do i feel like the lone sane voice in the mental assylum?
November 20, 2001 8:40:48 AM

I had 4 doa boards of that brand type, I am betting the mobo is the problem. If the psu dosent fix it, try swapping the mobo.

"The Cash Left In My Pocket,The BEST Benchmark"
No Overclock+stock hsf=GOOD!
Anonymous
a b à CPUs
November 20, 2001 10:31:51 AM

Go gere:
<A HREF="http://forum.ocworkbench.com/ocwbcgi/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb..." target="_new">http://forum.ocworkbench.com/ocwbcgi/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb...;/A>

More than likely a ECS K7SA "sighting". RMA your board. Try to get hold of an earlier revision (yeah, you read it right.. an EARLIER rev). Read the FAQ linked above, its *very* in depth, and im pretty sure it describes your issues.

I have the same board as you.. and though it seems I have been very lukcy with it, im not recommending it anymore for now. Too many headaches.. too bad, cause its a great chipset. Now if someone would just build a good board around it..

= The views stated herein are my personal views, and not necessarily the views of my wife. =
November 20, 2001 11:18:28 AM

Good to see youve come around, bb, out of respect for you I have been holding back the desire to throughly ream that boards rep on this forum LOL.


For the first week after my 4 hour frys hell escapade, I wanted to reply to every ecs735 reccomendation for the last 3 weeks and say.


THAT BOARD STOLE 4 HOURS OF MY LFIE AT FRYS AND I HATE IT AND ALL THOSE WHO SUPPORT IT.


But I remained cool and collected lol. I hate ecs!

"The Cash Left In My Pocket,The BEST Benchmark"
No Overclock+stock hsf=GOOD!
Anonymous
a b à CPUs
November 20, 2001 11:42:58 AM

>Good to see youve come around,

Well.. not easy really.. See, this board is the best motherboard I have had so far. Im serious.. its completely issue-less.. and fast.. stable, not to mention it was probably half the price of any other motherboard I ever owned. It runs any hardware I throw at it.. it runs day and night crunching Seti or cure for cancer thing.. Its even more boring than my old BX board.

And now, I can not even recommend it.. gives me mixed feelings. I guess I won the lotterly with this one, but then again, so did my brother who also bought one recently. Also completely issue-less. Boring.. fast.. cheap.

while there are too many reports to indicate that something is loose with ECS quality control.. I remain having faith in the SiS 735 chipset. WHy dont MSI/ASUS/ABIT etc bring out such a board ?

= The views stated herein are my personal views, and not necessarily the views of my wife. =
Anonymous
a b à CPUs
November 20, 2001 2:08:01 PM

I have got exactly the same prob with my Abit kg-7 and 1600 xp. I have replaced the RAM, but it still does it.
i am going to take the mobo back and get it swapped. The case, mobo, cpu and ram were all bought at the same time. It only sees mine as at 1Gb! My RAM says it is 1.5v and i have run it at that.
I am now thinking maybe it is the PSU that is in the case.... all i know is it has never worked as it should from when i bought it 10 days ago.
November 20, 2001 6:37:12 PM

"I had 4 doa boards of that brand type" -ROFLMAO buy more by all means =)

Everyone has the time and money to swap out parts, but thats the best part about owning AMD huh?
November 20, 2001 6:53:12 PM

He RMA'd the faulty motherboards. Obviously that's poor quality control, not a faulty or immature platform. Lots of people have had problems with the K7S5A, which is why I'm waiting for Abit's :) 

<font color=orange>Quarter</font color=orange> <font color=blue>Pounder</font color=blue> <font color=orange>Inside</font color=orange>
November 20, 2001 9:46:31 PM

Lets play the mobo game.

Pssst, hey buddy... you got a good AMD mobo? I got 4 bad ones for ya cause I didnt learn after the first three DOA's.

Totally explains why he has to underclock his AMD.

AMD doesnt give 2 cents about QA, third parties, or your CPU investment.
November 20, 2001 11:30:54 PM

And you're saying Intel does? I mean, come on! There are obviously P4-based mobos that also malfunction and are sent back. This has nothing to do with AMD.

AMD technology + Intel technology = Intel/AMD Pentathlon IV; the <b>ULTIMATE</b> PC processor
Anonymous
a b à CPUs
November 21, 2001 12:39:27 AM

Hi Kinney
I came here because I had a similar problem, and was looking for a solution. Previously had a 1.4 Gig Athlon which worked perfectly, until I was too liberal with the Arctic Silver and fried it, and then ran into your problem as soon as I'd replaced it with an XP1800 I.e. It refused to boot at anything over 122 MHz FSB. On reading all the responses you had, and with the info from Tom's Athlon XP2000+ overclock, I tried increasing the core voltage. Their overclocked Athlon 2000+ has been pushed to 1.85V, although the norm seems to be 1.75. I changed it to 1.80, and although Windows actually booted up (at last!), 3DMark didn't want to know.

1.825 volts, and 3DMark got as far as the Matrix test, before crashing

1.85 volts, and I now have a 3DMark of 6950 (previous best 6713, with the 1.4 Gig Athlon)

I'll use it for a while and ensure that it stays stable, and keeps on rebooting, but I'm sure I know what the problem is, now. The 400W PSU I have cost £29. I spent more than this on my heatsink! The recommended ones are £150...
Anyway, I've learned my lesson, and will order a decent one now.
Good luck with yours!
Anonymous
a b à CPUs
November 21, 2001 2:24:57 AM

kinney, I'm having the same problem with my K7S5A and my Athlon 1.4GHz T-Bird. It will only run stable at the 100/xxx setting. So its running down at 1050MHz. I also can up the RAM setting to 133 keeping the CPU at 100 and be stable. I think the problem lies in the mobo. I've flashed to the most recent BIOS, tried ddr and sdr RAM, different OSs, different HDs and Video Cards and upgraded to a 350Watt Enermax PSU. None of these solved the problem. If I come across a solution I'll post here. Please do the same. Thanks
November 21, 2001 2:49:32 AM

yeah I'm sure there are intel boards with problems, we never hear about that here though. But I'm sure there are still intel boards with problems. Almost every 3rd post here is someone having trouble with an amd board, but I'd bet there are lots of people with intel problems too.

AMD = Anger Management Disorder
November 21, 2001 5:16:29 AM

I didnt rma the bords, I returned one to frys, for a replacement, I told the frys people I would NOT leave till I had the system working(brought it with me) they gave me some tools and a monitor and let me do my thing, so I swapped 4 boards, and all of them were doa......I told them screw this board, and bought a kg7 raid. Then they put the dead boards back on the shelves...::sighs::. Frys sucks.

"The Cash Left In My Pocket,The BEST Benchmark"
No Overclock+stock hsf=GOOD!
November 21, 2001 3:18:40 PM

Quote:
Almost every 3rd post here is someone having trouble with an amd board,


And the other two are from me :) 

Quote:
Frys sucks.


Went there last night, they were selling a Visiontek MX200 for $80!! I didn't stay long.

<font color=orange>Quarter</font color=orange> <font color=blue>Pounder</font color=blue> <font color=orange>Inside</font color=orange>
Anonymous
a b à CPUs
November 21, 2001 5:12:13 PM

"My ram is running at 133 and the system is stable. The cpu freq is what makes the system unstable @133. You can run the memory at 133 without the FSB being 133 correct?"


Not necessarily true. I had a board do exactly the same thing, I was trying to run my 900MHz (9*100) AMD at 933 (7*133). It worked for a few minutes and then it would lock. I downclocked it back to 900 but used a memory divider to run my ram at 133MHz. While using a FSB of 133 my system was not stable, but using the memory divider with a 100MHz FSB the computer was rock solid. This was all done on PC100 RAM. I replaced the RAM with CAS2 133 From Crucial and everything was fine. The memory divider does not take full advantage of the ram and doesn’t push it as hard. When you say you have the chip clocked at 1.1 GHz, you aren’t running at 133 FSB, thus not pushing the ram to it’s fullest, which gives you stability. If you think it is the chip, try clocking it to 1GHz (7*133) and see if it’s stable. I’d bet money it won’t be.
Anonymous
a b à CPUs
November 22, 2001 4:14:00 AM

The problem definitely isn't your CPU. I would bet the motherboard is the problem. Stay away from ECS and other cheap boards. You're better off spending a little more money on a ASUS/MSI/Gigabyte board for the stability and quality components.
November 22, 2001 7:10:32 AM

If you lower fsb from 133 to 100, can you still clock ram at 133?
I'm not quite shure,but I think that if you lower fsb the rest of the system follows(including ram,whatever the bios setting for the ram is).
November 22, 2001 7:48:41 AM

Yes you can, many motherboards had host+pci clk for ram, which took the fsb and added 33mhz to it, to make full use of the pc133 ram, with newer mobos however, the fsb and ram run in sync and this feature is not needed.

"The Cash Left In My Pocket,The BEST Benchmark"
No Overclock+stock hsf=GOOD!
Anonymous
a b à CPUs
November 22, 2001 11:08:04 AM

Did you read my posting above ? Go here:
<A HREF="http://forum.ocworkbench.com/ocwbcgi/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb..." target="_new">http://forum.ocworkbench.com/ocwbcgi/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb...;/A>

You are not alone, so much is clear. Here is a quote:
Problem:

Some K7S5A (and M830) motherboards suffer from what appears to be a data corruption problem when used with certain CPU’s. <snip> The problem appears to be limited to motherboards with the number 4 or higher on a small sticker by the PCI slots.

Symptoms:
Memtest86 Errors, 133/133 failures and problems, Crashes, Blue Screens, Windows Protection Errors, OS installation failures, corrupted CD burns, Windows Registry corruption, general data corruption, etc.




= The views stated herein are my personal views, and not necessarily the views of my wife. =
!