Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

overclocking 1.6A Northwood

Last response: in CPUs
Share
Anonymous
a b à CPUs
a b K Overclocking
May 13, 2002 6:01:43 AM

I just got a p4 1.6A cpu, with a Asus P4S533 and a stick of corsair pc2700(CM64SD256-2700CX2H). I've never done any drastic overclocking and I just wanted to be as sure as possible that I'm not gonna fry my investment. Anyway, switching the FSB up to 133 mhz setting seems to give me an easy overclock to 2.1 ghz, however, I have noticed some stability problems. I'm reluctant to raise my v core voltage, even though I know I should have to and am wanting advise on how far I should raise it. Also, what cpu temp is good to stay under on p4 chips. In other words, can I get away with using a stock cooler. Lastly, my motherboard is setting my ddr stick to 2.5 cas, even though it's rated for 2 cas on Corsairs web sight. When I manually set the ram to 2 cas my system won't boot. The board came factory set to 2.5v. Should I really be running the memory at 2.7 or 2.9 volts? If so, could this enable me to lower my latency timings? I also have no clue about what RAS precharge timing, CAS delay, and active time should be set at. I know its a lot to ask, but any help would be greatly appreciated.

More about : overclocking northwood

May 13, 2002 6:13:27 AM

Raise the core voltage a tad, it wont hurt anything.


I feel sorry for the p4+ddr owners though, losing 10% of your performance over rdram just isnt worth it imo.

:wink: The Cash Left In My Pocket,The BEST Benchmark :wink:
May 13, 2002 7:17:24 AM

KDog, Matisaro has no clue wtf he is talking about.

That board can reach PC800 speeds with a little overclocking. Good choice of boards I might add.

You cannot fry your CPU, so do not worry about the chance of it. Keep your temps down and you will have a nice stable overclock.

You can overvolt your ram if you reach your limit and ram is a factor. other than that leave it at devault 2.5v.

Set your mobo for most agressive memory timing to get good gains. The lower the number like 2-2-2 is best, but you might have to test several settings to see what is best for your ram at your overclock speed.

Keep it under 40c

You are limited to what your mind can perceive.
Related resources
May 13, 2002 11:13:07 AM

Agreed, Matisaro is wrong! DDR RAM is actually faster than RDRAM in some cases. DDR333 is faster than PC800 at default speeds on that particular board. If you have really good Samsung DDR RAM (which he doesn't unfortunately), you can raise the FSB to 150MHz, set the ratio to 4:6 (bus:memory), set the voltage to 2.9V and run it at semi-aggressive settings and volia, 450MHz DDR RAM that will toast even PC1066. The P4 with the P4S533 is the best deal I've ever seen in a long long time! Way to go SiS, Asus, and Intel! :smile:

:wink: <b><i>"A penny saved is a penny earned!"</i></b> :wink:
May 13, 2002 11:18:42 AM

Quote:
im in the process of building a new computer right now, why? you ask, because MOHAA runs like crap on my present system. and yes its great if games like DOOM3 pushes game graphics to the next level. but how many people are going to bother spending a thousand dollars or more on brand new systems, just to play new games?


He said he was overclocking, overclocked rdram is never slower than overclocked ddr, there is no if ands or buts about it amd_man, furthermore the pc800 rdram is cheaper than ddr333, further furthermore, the overclock you get from ddr may be slightly higher than the rdram, but not enough to make up for the rdram benifit.

I am completely right on this one, no one is talking about stock, and now I feel dirty for defending rambus ::vomits::


Quote:
If you have really good Samsung DDR RAM (which he doesn't unfortunately), you can raise the FSB to 150MHz, set the ratio to 4:6 (bus:memory), set the voltage to 2.9V and run it at semi-aggressive settings and volia, 450MHz DDR RAM that will toast even PC1066.


Are you suggesting that everyone who buys ddr ram from samsung is going to get a 450mhz run out of it? I highly doubt it since they just released 400mhz ddr which is near its top out.

The ddr p4 is not a better value than the rdram p4, there may be rare occurances where ddr can be oced to 450(as you say) and beat 1066, but those are RARE, whereas most samsung pc800 will do 1066 easily.



:wink: The Cash Left In My Pocket,The BEST Benchmark :wink:
May 13, 2002 11:35:15 AM

Actually, no, at moderate FSB overclocks, DDR RAM is better than RDRAM either case. Think about it. With RDRAM, you're going to have to lower its multiplier just after 133MHz FSB. With DDR RAM, you can still run the RAM at 333MHz+. So at 150MHz FSB, you have 375MHz DDR RAM and PC900 RDRAM. I'd say performance will be about on par there.

On the SiS 645DX, DDR333 outmatches PC800.

Trust me, I've done my research and I have 9 links supporting my point that I had posted on Sharkey Extreme because some people didn't believe.

See <A HREF="http://www.sharkyforums.com/showthread.php?s=&postid=97..." target="_new">here</A>

I kind of got into a little argument with Rush over DDR RAM vs. RDRAM but I've settled it by posting those links.

:wink: <b><i>"A penny saved is a penny earned!"</i></b> :wink:
May 13, 2002 11:42:57 AM

If you lower the multiplier at 133+ yopu will have room to go even higher, fatburger is at 155fsb and running what pc1000, compared to say ddr 355 fatburgers will out perform.



LOoking at some of your benchmark links, I see that stock pc800 is so close to 333, that the ONLY way ddr could hope to win is 400mhz+ which is extremely rare.

:wink: The Cash Left In My Pocket,The BEST Benchmark :wink:
May 13, 2002 11:45:23 AM

Need I remind you were are not comparing 800 to 333, we are comparing 1066 to 333, you cannot expect to have ddr which will guarentee 400mhz performance, while all samsung rdram will do 1066, IMO, rdram is better for the p4.

:wink: The Cash Left In My Pocket,The BEST Benchmark :wink:
May 13, 2002 11:55:52 AM

Actually, at 155MHz FSB, you'd be running the RAM at 387.5MHz assumming you've set the ratio to 4:5. Samsung DDR RAM is virtually guaranteed to run at 400MHz at the most aggressive settins and significantly higher at slightly at slightly less aggressive settings.

Go to hardforum or asusboards or even sharkey extreme forums, if you don't believe me. They've got some very insightful people there.

:wink: <b><i>"A penny saved is a penny earned!"</i></b> :wink:
May 13, 2002 11:57:31 AM

Need I remind you that Samsung makes extremely overclockable RAM whether it's DDR or RDRAM? I wrote a list of when DDR is better than RDRAM and vise versa on Hardforum, let me get it.

:wink: <b><i>"A penny saved is a penny earned!"</i></b> :wink:
May 13, 2002 12:00:04 PM

At default speed for a Northwood A, the SiS 645DX with DDR333 or faster wins.

At default speed for a Northwood B with PC800 and 533MHz FSB, the SiS 645DX wins

At default speed for a Northwood B with PC1066 and a 533MHz FSB, the i850 wins

At moderately overclocked speeds over 133MHz, at around a ~150MHz FSB, the SiS 645DX most likely wins assuming you have highly overclockable Samsung DDR RAM that can handle ~450MHz DDR (225MHz).

At high bus speeds, approaching 177MHz, RDRAM wins again.

:wink: <b><i>"A penny saved is a penny earned!"</i></b> :wink:
May 13, 2002 12:01:10 PM

387mhz ddr is not faster than pc1066 ddr IMO.

From the reviews I have read, ddr on the p4 is not better than rdram.

:wink: The Cash Left In My Pocket,The BEST Benchmark :wink:
May 13, 2002 12:02:59 PM

No one is talking about default speed, and the third line you mentioned is the applicable one, the only time ddr beats rdram is when you can overclock it to 375+ or more, your benchmarks didnt show any 1066 versus 400ddr iirc.

:wink: The Cash Left In My Pocket,The BEST Benchmark :wink:
May 13, 2002 12:05:47 PM

What? Didn't you say under a 155MHz FSB? That would make the RDRAM run at PC930 and the DDR RAM at 387.5MHz. I'm not comparing PC1066 against DDR directly, I'm comparing which one is better what which FSB speeds. See my last post.

:wink: <b><i>"A penny saved is a penny earned!"</i></b> :wink:
May 13, 2002 12:06:48 PM

Matisaro, if you want to overclock beyond a 133MHz FSB, you won't be able to keep the 4X RDRAM multiplier in most cases.

:wink: <b><i>"A penny saved is a penny earned!"</i></b> :wink:
May 13, 2002 12:11:47 PM

If you go 1066 and 133 fsb, you will most likely be able to jack it a little more, say 140 with the same multiplier, this will ENSURE a victory, if you have to go to the 3/4 multiplier you can then jack the fsb even higher till you reach the northwoods limit.

Either way rdram wins.

:wink: The Cash Left In My Pocket,The BEST Benchmark :wink:
May 13, 2002 12:17:25 PM

You'd need nearly a 177MHz FSB to approach PC1066 speeds again, and that's going to be hard for even the P4.

For a P4 1.6A that's 2832MHz
For a P4 1.8A that's 3186MHz.
For a P4 2.0A that's 3540MHz.

Need I go on?


:wink: <b><i>"A penny saved is a penny earned!"</i></b> :wink:
May 13, 2002 12:26:35 PM

Back to the topic at hand, raise the vcore voltage a bit and test for stability using Prime95. Then set the RAM to the most aggressive setting. Then if it's still stable, raise the FSB to 150MHz, leaving the RAM at the 4:5 Ratio, and raise the voltage of the core and the RAM up a bit. Then you'll have an easy 2.4GHz P4 with a 600MHz FSB and 375MHz DDR RAM. You'll also want the temperature to stay under 65C.

:wink: <b><i>"A penny saved is a penny earned!"</i></b> :wink:
May 13, 2002 4:19:38 PM

Thats the thing, it dosent need to get all the way back to 1066 to be able to beat the ddr.

Juin posted a bunch of benchmarks which put rdram ahead.(a while back)

:wink: The Cash Left In My Pocket,The BEST Benchmark :wink:
May 13, 2002 4:28:19 PM

Um, you realize, that DDR RAM also overclocks. As long as both of them increase in MHz at a constant linear rate, they will both be neck and neck.

A while back, the SiS 645DX wasn't out.

:wink: <b><i>"A penny saved is a penny earned!"</i></b> :wink: <P ID="edit"><FONT SIZE=-1><EM>Edited by AMD_Man on 05/13/02 12:29 PM.</EM></FONT></P>
May 13, 2002 5:38:20 PM

I disagree on the linear rate, after all, the difference between ddr 333 and ddr 400 is only 66mhz, while the difference between 1066 and 800 is 266mhz, its not linear at all.

:wink: The Cash Left In My Pocket,The BEST Benchmark :wink:
May 13, 2002 7:53:17 PM

No, I mean the rate at which the memory increases is a ratio of the FSB speed. That applies for both RDRAM and DDR RAM. As the FSB increases, the speed of the RDRAM or DDR RAM increases at the same rate. Not necessarily The same number of MHz but the same rate.

:wink: <b><i>"A penny saved is a penny earned!"</i></b> :wink:
May 13, 2002 9:01:12 PM

I'm not overly impressed of the SiS645DX after reading benchmarks posted by THG, not so long ago, showing how the soon to come DDR266 based Intel i845G chipset (with support for 533 MHz FSB) blew away all competition except PC1066 RDRAM. Yes, it's only DDR266 and still beats the crap out of SiS645DX. The explanation given by THG was that Intel had to improve memory bandwidth drastically as the built-in graphics support also needs some bandwidth. So they simply optimized the i845D, and apparently did a nice job. Unfortunately somebody told THG to remove the benchmarks shortly after, as the information was probably under some sort of a NDA. Still the results were impresive, and I'm waiting anxiously to see some official benchmarks. I expect the i845G to be announced next week.

So at present I'm looking out for a i845G based board which has built-in graphics performing more or less like a GeForce2 MX as far as I remember. This will provide cheap graphics and tolerable performance until the upcoming graphics War has settled. With NVidia, ATI, 3DLabs and even Matrox all dishing up with highly potent stuff in the next couple of month, I will be able get by until the best price/performance deal emerges. Then I'm going to disable the on-board graphics and dedicate all memory bandwidth to the CPU itself. I've not made my mind up completely yet as I'm waiting for more official benchmarks and comments, but this is how I see it right now.

<i>/Copenhagen - Clockspeed will make the difference... in the end</i> :cool:
May 13, 2002 9:13:14 PM

That suggests that the i845G might be using dual-channel DDR. Obviously, new and better chipsets will always be released but currently the SiS 645DX can't be beat against current RDRAM.

:wink: <b><i>"A penny saved is a penny earned!"</i></b> :wink:
May 13, 2002 9:21:09 PM

<blockquote><font size=1>Svar på:</font><hr><p>That suggests that the i845G might be using dual-channel DDR.<p><hr></blockquote><p>No, no, no. That's the amazing part. It's a single channel DDR266 and it owns SiS645DX. I have to add that it also supports USB 2.0 (6 ports!), using the new ICH4. Furthermore, it's to be relased in less than a month !
But we'll have to see how it will be priced. With built-in graphics, which is usually used in cheap systems, I don't expect it to be more expensive than the i850E.

<i>/Copenhagen - Clockspeed will make the difference... in the end</i> :cool:
May 13, 2002 9:29:38 PM

Quote:
That suggests that the i845G might be using dual-channel DDR.


I would like to think that THG ran it with just one stick to make sure of that, but I can't say I'd be surprised if they didn't.

<font color=blue>Hi mom!</font color=blue>
May 14, 2002 7:25:28 AM

Quote:
I just wanted to be as sure as possible that I'm not gonna fry my investment.

the Intel Pentium4 processors are not prone to the meltdowns,...that AMD is well known for.

"<b>AMD/VIA!</b>...you are <i>still</i> the weakest link, good bye!"
May 14, 2002 11:17:55 AM

The only way the i845G might beat the SiS 645DX with slower RAM is that if they're either using dual-channel DDR, or an L3 cache or some sort.

:wink: <b><i>"A penny saved is a penny earned!"</i></b> :wink:
May 14, 2002 3:07:23 PM

<blockquote><font size=1>Svar på:</font><hr><p>The only way the i845G might beat the SiS 645DX with slower RAM is that if they're either using dual-channel DDR, or an L3 cache or some sort.<p><hr></blockquote><p>I'm telling you, it has no dual-channel DDR. We'll hear a lot more very soon and it's not the way AMD defines the word soon.

<i>/Copenhagen - Clockspeed will make the difference... in the end</i> :cool:
May 14, 2002 4:48:04 PM

Quote:
the Intel Pentium4 processors are not prone to the meltdowns,...that AMD is well known for.


Why do I feel like a someone running a carnival game, and you're the little kid spending all his money trying to with the big pink bunny, but no matter how hard you try, you keep failing?

<font color=blue>Hi mom!</font color=blue>
!