Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

Help needed...

Last response: in CPUs
Share
Anonymous
a b à CPUs
March 11, 2002 12:06:34 AM

OK, here's the situation.

I was using a PII @ 300 MHz with 64MB/100MHz RAM. At the BIOS, the max option for bus speed was 83MHz and the multiplier could go up to 6.5x. I installed 128MB/133MHz RAM and my PC went automatically at 450 MHz, giving me up to 112 MHz at the BIOS. Everything was working absolutely FINE, FASTER, and STABLE. Something went wrong trying to install Internet Explorer, I had to re-install win98, and the next time I booted-up, it ran at 300 MHz, with the previous BIOS settings (up to 83 MHz etc). I tried uninstalling and reinstalling both cartridges (64 and 128 MB ram) but the problem is still there.

Can anyone explain and/or help me? Running at 450 MHz was much better.

Thanks in advance,

X-man

X-man

More about : needed

March 11, 2002 5:30:26 AM

I guess you have a 440LX chipset based board, which actually wont support 100 MHz FSB. with 83 you could get to as high as 378 MHz, 100 MHz will get you 450 MHz.

I doubt the multiplier could work, since Intel locked it roughly around P-II 300 times.

girish

<font color=red>Nothing is fool-proof. Fools are Ingenious!</font color=red>
Anonymous
a b à CPUs
March 11, 2002 7:12:44 PM

Well, actually it's a 440BX board and it actually worked at 112 MHz (as I previously said).

So, if anyone knows what's going on, please help...



X-man
Related resources
Anonymous
a b à CPUs
March 12, 2002 9:59:13 PM

I got only one answer to my question. Chances are:

a) It's such an easy question nobody bothers to answer
b) It's not an interesting question
c) Nobody cares
d) Nobody knows what happened

But again, if anyone has even the slightest idea of what has happened and, especially, what can be done to go back to 450 MHz, please drop a line.

Thanks.

X-man
March 12, 2002 10:09:52 PM

First there are only two settings you can set to overclock your processor, first you can change your multiplier or you can change your FSB speed. If you change you FSB speed you will run all the other bus out of spec like PCI, AGP etc. If your processor is not locked then you should just change the multiplier to 6.5x which should give you about 430Mhz (66Mhzx6.5x~429). If you still want more juice then you can increase the Front side bus speed.

If your processor is locked then you can't do anything with the multiplier you will have to modify FSB speed to overclock it. Just do it in steps of 5 and see how stable you get. First install everything with the normal speed then change the FSB until it starts giving you problems.

KG
March 12, 2002 10:25:37 PM

hmmmm interesting case

you have a 300mhz, on a BX (100mhz) board, yet to get 450 you would have had to be running at 66.6mhz bus speed initially
i.e 66.6x4.5 = 300
then when u put the new ram in it flicked the bus speed up to 100 for some reason
giving you 4.5 x 100 = 450.
strange

there SHOULD be an option in the bios that allows you to select what bus speed to run at, typically 66,75,83,100 or 112.
as you jumped from 300 to 450 im not suprised your having troubles.
be careful and TEST to see if 450 is stable before doing anything.

to help u out:
ram stability testing: memtest86, sandra
cpu stress testing: prime95, seti@home, PI



I love helping people in Toms Forums... It reinforces my intellectual superiority! :smile:
Anonymous
a b à CPUs
March 12, 2002 10:34:15 PM

Maybe i did not clarify this one a lot.

It jumped to 450 and it worked JUST FINE and STABLE!! Absolutely no problem. And it gave me all the options from 66 to 112. And THEN, it just disappeared, after reinstalling win98 (which I don't think/know if has anything to do, probably not, but after all it's a microsoft product, so everything possible).

So, bottom line, my problem is: How did I get 4.5 * 100 and all the options up to 112 (logical explanation: RAM was running at 133, sth went good etc) and then how (and why) did i lose that and went back to 300, with my option going as far as 83 MHz. It's really strange but I will keep on seeking an answer (expecting your opinions too).

As for benchmarks, checking the system with an old one (WinBench 99 from ZDNet) gave me 33 (as a mark) when running at 450MHz compared to 21 (as a mark) when running at 300. So, I guess you can understand why I want it back to 450, right? :-)


X-man
March 12, 2002 10:40:50 PM

yessss...
but u said an install of internet explorer didnt work. did u find out why?

go into your BIOS. there should be bus speed options in there. read your motherboard manual for more info.

I love helping people in Toms Forums... It reinforces my intellectual superiority! :smile:
Anonymous
a b à CPUs
March 12, 2002 10:53:04 PM

I believe it was a really messed up CD from a magazine, so I didn't check on it too much. In the BIOS, I can choose from 66 to 83 ONLY (as before the whole thing).

I can understand that going from 300 to 450 was way to much, but a) it did it automatically!!! b) it worked pretty fast and stable (except the internet explorer incident) c) if i can get those bios setting with 100, 103, 112 MHz fsb again I will try lower speeds to test it this time.

The weird thing was that it did everything automatically. It gave me the "new" options for FSB and run at 450 flat (i mean that in the bios there are two options: AUTO where u just choose CPU speed, and manual where u choose FSB and Multiplier - and it automatically chose AUTO 450 MHz).

So, still looking forn an answer... Maybe i should run with only the 64/100MHz RAM for a couple of days and then try again :-P

X-man
March 13, 2002 12:18:36 AM

well something in there is forcing the switch between 66 and 100 fsb.
possibly there is a jumper on the motherboard that lets u definitively set it to one or the other, i bet at the moment its set to 'jumper free'

I love helping people in Toms Forums... It reinforces my intellectual superiority! :smile:
March 13, 2002 12:49:49 AM

It may be helpful if you told us the exact motherboard brand and model. Most of the 300/66 chips were OCable to 450/100, I know I had one for over a year!

Withou knowing the board I may suggest a BIOS update. Also is this a true jumperless board or not. I guess I would not need to ask that if I know what board though.....

Jesus saves, but Mario scores!!!
Anonymous
a b à CPUs
March 13, 2002 10:02:18 PM

Of course, I thought I had given the model of the motherboard, but i hadn't. It's the ECS (Elite) P6BX-A+ model. It has the 440BX chip on and specifies that is supports 100 MHz host & memory bus. It doesn't says how, though!!!

Thanks for all the opinions. If i don't manage to get it back to 450, I will turn it off and go back to my CPC 6128 (with green monitor). :p 

X-man
March 13, 2002 10:04:29 PM

so worried about overclocking and getting a fast PC...why dont you save ytourself the trouble and get the P4 or the XP 2100+?
Anonymous
a b à CPUs
March 13, 2002 10:13:59 PM

Not a bad idea but...

a) I will be gone for a couple of years in the army, so why buy something NOW since I won't be using? If i buy sth, that should be a laptop, so I can easily take it with me.
b) I am not that worried about running at 450 (it's not that fast anyways!), I am just worried to see how this happened and how did my system go from Status-A to Status-B and then back to A.
c) After all, overclocking and improvement in general is about getting the maximum out of what you got, right?

Cheers,



X-man
March 13, 2002 10:45:50 PM

you are a moron u know that?

think about this for a minute... if he could AFFORD a superfast processor, dont u think he would get one?????

I love helping people in Toms Forums... It reinforces my intellectual superiority! :smile:
Anonymous
a b à CPUs
March 13, 2002 11:05:30 PM

Well, actually it's not a matter of affording, it's more like a matter of value for money. For the reasons I mentioned above, plus since I am not doing any super-heavy work, there is no need to by THE fastest processor around. If i was to buy sth now, if it's not the laptop (sth like HP XE3/PIII 1.06), I would probably get an XP 1700+.

But as I said, I don't think I will be using it soon, so I'll probably get the 8 GHz processor in 2 years (or so, don't they double every 6 months? :p )

Cheers,

X-man
March 13, 2002 11:32:03 PM

This problem most likely has to do with the PCI/AGP divisor. If your PCI divider is set to 1:2 and 1:1, you'll only be able to scale to 83MHz as 100MHz FSB would have your PCI running at 50MHz and your AGP at 100MHz. Your system will only scale higher when the divisors are set at 1:3 PCI and 2:3 AGP (33:100 and 66:100). Normally these are changed as a single setting. Somehow the divisors got changed and then changed back.

I thought a thought, but the thought I thought wasn't the thought I thought I had thought.
March 13, 2002 11:38:54 PM

well my comment was to moneymike who is just a trolling twat.

and yes... one gets what one needs/affords.
i dont bother with the latest and greatest becauz within a month it aint anymore.

i personally seem to be upgrading in a 2x fashion...
i.e.
p-166
p2-300
celleron-500
athlon 1200

and i wont be upgrading till 2400mhz processors are common.

I love helping people in Toms Forums... It reinforces my intellectual superiority! :smile:
Anonymous
a b à CPUs
March 19, 2002 9:27:29 PM

So, it's a matter of divisors - but since I can't find any options about the divisors in my BIOS, and I did not change any jumpers, how did that happen? If you how someone can affect the divisors (usually) in 440BX Motherboards, give a hint. I will keep on searching. Thanks, though!!!


X-man
!