Anyone had troubles with overclocking?
#11
Really?

I had little to no option here... But even being a quite low-end mobo it features good OC'ing options...

(But yes, anyway the first piece I'm thinking on changing as soon as financially possible is the mobo)
Reply

Sponsored links

#12
as its price oc features are not bad but g31 chipset wasnt created for OC. It has only 3phase power supllying which is not enough for quad, in result mobo get higher temps, with OC make things even worse, watch your mobo temps.
Intel Dual Core E5200 @ 3,5ghz /gigabyte GF9500GT/2 GB RAM / ASRock P45XE/ Corsair CMPSU-400CXEU
Reply
#13
I see... Nice info, thanks.

For now, everything seems normal here since I still didn't mess with vcore, and ventilation is good. That info will come in handy while experimenting.
Reply
#14
You say you didn't 'mess with vcore'. Did you leave it on Auto? Because if you did, change it immediately. Auto does not equal stock voltage! Always input vcore manually when overclocking, even if you leave it at stock voltage, INPUT IT MANUALLY! Leaving it on Auto will result in the motherboard overvolting automatically to stabilise any overclocking you do, and it almost always gives the CPU more vcore than it needs. You risk pumping ridiculous amounts of vcore if you leave it on Auto and try to overclock the CPU too high.

As for your motherboard, it's pretty much the lowest-end motherboard of the P3x chipsets, and is meant to be a budget board for low-end builds and CPUs. I'm pretty sure it doesn't even have all solid capacitors. I wouldn't want to put any extra stress on the motherboard.
[Image: yunacopy.jpg]
Reply
#15
Yes !! thats common mistake for newbie overclockers which can cost much, somehow i never did Tongue2
Intel Dual Core E5200 @ 3,5ghz /gigabyte GF9500GT/2 GB RAM / ASRock P45XE/ Corsair CMPSU-400CXEU
Reply
#16
well, I think everyone who had overclocked their CPU had problems, ya know? theres always a frist time for all of us ... you just dont mess around with the voltage if you are new to this, because it reduces your cpus life ...
Edite by moderator.... smaller signature, thanks... <== Best Sig EVER! Thank you! X3
Reply
#17
Leaving voltage on Auto is worse than messing with voltages since you at least know just how much voltage you're using.
[Image: yunacopy.jpg]
Reply
#18
(09-04-2009, 12:21 PM)Air Wrote: Air's quickie Guide! Because he gets annoyed by people who say things like "if you don't know already then there's no point in helping you learn."

Rule #1: Prime95 is a crap tester of stability. Yes, everyone still uses it, only because nothing else out there has any "simple" error reporting mechanism. But by no means is even a 12 hr test on Prime95 mean you're reasonably stable on a multicore system

Rule #2: If you have a 64-bit operating system, use IntelBurnTest instead.

Rule #3: If you have a 32-bit operating system use CoreDamage plus IntelBurnTest (both running at the same time), because CoreDamage works a lot better for stressing out 32 bit mode (but doesn't do any error tests of its own).

Rule #4: The most important factor in good overclocking is having a high quality motherboard known for giving good OC results. It sounds like you don't have one, and all the OC'ing knowledge and tips in the world can't overcome that limitation.

I'll warn you now -- in my own experience a machine that could run Prime95 stable for hours would fail the IntelBurnTest / CoreDamage combo in a few seconds. Also, I've been known to use the PCSX2 Suite Solution in Visual Studio as a stress test. For some reason the Intel Optimizing Compiler loves to crash on unstable CPUs, even when most other apps or games would never have any problems. But since your motherboard sounds like it has pretty crappy OC'ing options, I don't expect you'd be able to squeeze anything more than what you already have out of it.

I found this quick guild is quite helpful especially the softares Air recommanded, so you may want to try them out and test if your 3.4ghz is really stable.
AMD Athlon II 245 @ 3.55ghz, 9600GT @730mhz 1115mhz, vista sp2 32bit
Reply
#19
(10-14-2009, 01:26 AM)boogerthe2nd Wrote: Leaving voltage on Auto is worse than messing with voltages since you at least know just how much voltage you're using.

That's what voltage monitor software, voltage readings in bios, and voltmeters are for, silly. Just have to pick your poison is all.

It also depends on different motherboards. Mine set vcore to 1.36v when set to auto. After a lot of messing around, I found that 1.36v is the perfect amount. Even manually setting vcore to 1.35v, vdroop can drop my vcore to as low as 1.28v under load, which is not that bad actually. However, random spikes in clock rate (i.e. from an idle state to a busy state) can cause my vcore to drop to 1.26v, which is low enough to cause a BSOD now and then.

Yeah, passing stability tests mean nothing if your vcore drops whenever there's a random spike in clock rate. That's the main thing to watch out for.
Nappa: Vegeta! What does the scouter say about his power level?
Vegeta: It's...one thousand and six.
Nappa: Wh-...really?
Vegeta: Yeah! Beat him up Nappa!
Nappa: Yay!
Reply
#20
(10-14-2009, 03:32 AM)dr_thrax Wrote: However, random spikes in clock rate (i.e. from an idle state to a busy state) can cause my vcore to drop to 1.26v, which is low enough to cause a BSOD now and then.

Ah! That would explain why using MSVC is, for me, one of the best stability tests. The Microsoft Optimizing Compiler will, more often than most stability tests, cause Invalid Operations if my CPU is unstable. With a 4-core system I also use it in conjunction with something like CoreDamage for stability testing.

And also my Gigabyte EP45 mainboard was also exceptionally accurate with its VCore, PLL, and termination voltages set to Auto (it's ram voltage was way too low, though -- I really had to up that a lot to make my system run properly).
Jake Stine (Air) - Programmer - PCSX2 Dev Team
Reply




Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)