I had an Opteron 144 overclocked to 2.5GHz (4x DDR sticks, 2.6GHz with 2
sticks) so I checked out a few upgrade options to improve my 939 system.
The Opteron was so easy once I figured out how to manipulate the Gigabyte
Triton K8N - SLi mobo. Some software suggested that my HD2900XT would be
better suited to a 2.8GHz CPU so I thought that an FX55 O/C'd to 2.8 or 3GHz
should be no problem.
No matter what I do with this the bloody thing just crashes out with a BSOD.
I've just lost my Vista64 Harddrive and I remeber that it wont repair it
just reinstalls the OS.
Upping the CPU voltage doesnt work, the ratio, FSB and all seem to be
equally lost when I try to unlock the potential of this CPU.
Where am I going wrong?
Robin
FX55, Gigabyte K8n-SLI, Arctic cooling 64 freezer Pro, HIS HD2900XT (512MB)
and four sticks of Kingston DDR400
"Robin Gordon" <robingot@gotadsl.co.uk> wrote in message
news:e5udneMN8veLcYnaRVnyjwA@pipex.net...
>I had an Opteron 144 overclocked to 2.5GHz (4x DDR sticks, 2.6GHz with 2
>sticks) so I checked out a few upgrade options to improve my 939 system.
>The Opteron was so easy once I figured out how to manipulate the Gigabyte
>Triton K8N - SLi mobo. Some software suggested that my HD2900XT would be
>better suited to a 2.8GHz CPU so I thought that an FX55 O/C'd to 2.8 or
>3GHz should be no problem.
> No matter what I do with this the bloody thing just crashes out with a
> BSOD.
> I've just lost my Vista64 Harddrive and I remeber that it wont repair it
> just reinstalls the OS.
> Upping the CPU voltage doesnt work, the ratio, FSB and all seem to be
> equally lost when I try to unlock the potential of this CPU.
> Where am I going wrong?
The FX55 should be easier to O/C due to the completely unlocked multiplier.
I've seen some tests, however, where they just got one that wouldn't do much
at all. Most seem to do 2.8 to 3.0 on air. Tried 12 x 230? http://www.driverheaven.net/reviews/FX55/Conclusion.htm
"Augustus" <no_one@nowhere.net> wrote in message
news:TahRi.19418$G25.10003@edtnps89...
>
> "Robin Gordon" <robingot@gotadsl.co.uk> wrote in message
> news:e5udneMN8veLcYnaRVnyjwA@pipex.net...
>>I had an Opteron 144 overclocked to 2.5GHz (4x DDR sticks, 2.6GHz with 2
>>sticks) so I checked out a few upgrade options to improve my 939 system.
>>The Opteron was so easy once I figured out how to manipulate the Gigabyte
>>Triton K8N - SLi mobo. Some software suggested that my HD2900XT would be
>>better suited to a 2.8GHz CPU so I thought that an FX55 O/C'd to 2.8 or
>>3GHz should be no problem.
>> No matter what I do with this the bloody thing just crashes out with a
>> BSOD.
>> I've just lost my Vista64 Harddrive and I remeber that it wont repair it
>> just reinstalls the OS.
>> Upping the CPU voltage doesnt work, the ratio, FSB and all seem to be
>> equally lost when I try to unlock the potential of this CPU.
>> Where am I going wrong?
>
> The FX55 should be easier to O/C due to the completely unlocked
> multiplier. I've seen some tests, however, where they just got one that
> wouldn't do much at all. Most seem to do 2.8 to 3.0 on air. Tried 12 x
> 230?
> http://www.driverheaven.net/reviews/FX55/Conclusion.htm
>
I had all sorts of problems trying to oc my Ath64 4000+ (2.4GHz) until I
added some a fan thing to cool down the RAM. Now runs a treat at 2.8 Ghz
(12x233) using 4x512mb Ballistix ram at 2.5-2-2-2-6 2T - all at standard
voltage.
I've just tried 3dmark06 for a comparison and with an Opty 144 at 2.5GHz I
was getting in the region of 6200 marks but with the exact same setup but
using an FX55 at standard settings this comes down to 5230. What am I doing
wrong. The memory was running at 2:1.5 in the BIOS so that should not be as
good as an FX running at default setting surely? HTT was set at 1x
Robin Gordon wrote:
> I've just tried 3dmark06 for a comparison and with an Opty 144 at 2.5GHz I
> was getting in the region of 6200 marks but with the exact same setup but
> using an FX55 at standard settings this comes down to 5230. What am I doing
> wrong. The memory was running at 2:1.5 in the BIOS so that should not be as
> good as an FX running at default setting surely? HTT was set at 1x
>
> Robin
>
>
HTT presumably determines the speed of the interface on the processor, as
it connects to the Northbridge. Normally, this would be something like
5 x 200. If you overclock the processor, by raising the CPU input clock
above 200MHz, then you have to drop the HTT slightly. For example, say I
wanted to run the CPU input clock at 220MHz (a 10% overclock), then
an HTT of 4, as in 4 x 220 is less than the 1000MHz limit.
Setting the HTT to 1x, drops the bandwidth to the video card, by a factor
of 5. So that could account for a change in your benchmark results. Adjust
HTT properly, and try again, and you might get a few more points.
> I had all sorts of problems trying to oc my Ath64 4000+ (2.4GHz) until I
> added some a fan thing to cool down the RAM. Now runs a treat at 2.8 Ghz
> (12x233) using 4x512mb Ballistix ram at 2.5-2-2-2-6 2T - all at standard
> voltage.
>
> Glennbo
They're all different in some ways. My SanDiego A64 4000+ does 2.8 stably
but the temps are a bit higher for long term longevity than I prefer. I run
it 2.7 Ghz 24/7 (12x225) with a Zalman 7700 and no overvolting with just
generic PC3200 and it's never given issues. YMMV
I have tried umpteen times but a 144 running at 2.5GHz seems a lot faster
than the fx but how can that be. Surely the processers have a similar
architecture with cache etc.. Opty 144 2.5Gz = 6120 marks, fx55 at 2.6gz =
5120. It doesnt seem right does it.
The system is the same, only the CPU is changed.
What a waste of money if somebody bought the full priced FX55.
Robin wrote:
> I have tried umpteen times but a 144 running at 2.5GHz seems a lot faster
> than the fx but how can that be. Surely the processers have a similar
> architecture with cache etc.. Opty 144 2.5Gz = 6120 marks, fx55 at 2.6gz =
> 5120. It doesnt seem right does it.
> The system is the same, only the CPU is changed.
> What a waste of money if somebody bought the full priced FX55.
>
> Robin
>
Well, one thing is for sure. You won't find any info on the AMD
site to help you.
I'd try looking in the AMD section here. They have a search
tab, for looking in the older articles, and maybe you can find
something else to justify the differences.
Augustus you scribbled in [alt.comp.hardware.overclocking.amd]
on Wed, 17 Oct 2007 18:39:35 GMT
<HFsRi.35076$%B2.23649@edtnps82>
*
> > I had all sorts of problems trying to oc my Ath64 4000+ (2.4GHz) until I
> > added some a fan thing to cool down the RAM. Now runs a treat at 2.8 Ghz
> > (12x233) using 4x512mb Ballistix ram at 2.5-2-2-2-6 2T - all at standard
> > voltage.
> >
> > Glennbo
>
> They're all different in some ways. My SanDiego A64 4000+ does 2.8 stably
> but the temps are a bit higher for long term longevity than I prefer. I run
> it 2.7 Ghz 24/7 (12x225) with a Zalman 7700 and no overvolting with just
> generic PC3200 and it's never given issues. YMMV
>
Same here, I run a SanDiego A64 4000 and use a Lanparty NF4 SLi DR with
2 gigs of pc3200 at 2.7. I like the way it runs at this speed. If I
need the speed I can always push it but why mess with stability and
longevity? I did slightly up the voltage on the cpu and it seems more
stable at 2.7 and 2.8. The Lanparty boards are more particular because
they were made to overclock and tweak.
As I look into the future of quad cores, I will be sticking with my
Lanparty and the A64 4000 and put in a X2 later on until the quads come
down in prices and all the quirks smoothed out of the boards/cpu's.
Probably looking at 1 or 1 1/2 years before I change. Quad core is the
way it's going, so I'm looking forward to the innovation. I'm
considering getting an X2 now with a spare A64 4000 just in case I fry a
cpu.
fx55 O/Cing 
Linear Mode
