CheckEmoji Community · the emoji forum
🏠 Home 🆕 What's new ❓ Unanswered 🔥 Popular 📡 RSS Members 👥 0 online log in · register
Home › IT › Hardware › Desktops › Overclocking (Main Thread)

Overclocking (Main Thread)

Started by dustypilot23 · · 👁 189 views · 3.3K replies

📡 Subscribe to replies

Participants dustypilot23Morgan Ortiz69John Palmer4driftingnomad68neonhawk53rustyrider40brightgull15boldhound8Bradley Myers2driftingmarlin34Aelectriceagle40placidrangeramberorca192Rebecca Parkerwiredjackal7goldenowl73Jose Cook17Tyler Lee57Alex Palmer66Grace Palmer39Scott Morris8briskheron10Thomas Ward9 …
Kyle Sanchez4 Kyle Sanchez4 Newcomer
4 messages
joined Dec 2009
#2481 ·
Until it burns out, you can't really do anything else about it.
Rachel Fox4 Rachel Fox4 Member
12 messages
joined Apr 2009
#2482 ·
neonowl67 said:8, 9, 10... I've tried everything... it stays stable up to 250 FSB, but after that, it's a total system freeze. Clearing the CMOS was my next move, but nothing changed.
I honestly think he's hit his limit. I ran into two guys over at PCMag who had the exact same processor; their ceiling was 2.55 GHz just like mine at the default 1.35V voltage. If you bump it to 1.40V, you can squeeze out 2.66 GHz...

Your motherboard is faulty. It's the same board, same issue. It just won't stay stable past 252.😠

I'm going to have to retire this thing over the summer.
neonowl67 neonowl67 Newcomer
2 messages
joined Nov 2021
#2483 ·
Edward Peterson70 said:your motherboard is the culprit. I'm running the exact same board and hitting the exact same wall. It just won't stay stable once you push past 252.😠

I might have to retire this thing for the summer.

uh 😉
image

I lowered the HT link to 600... I'm an idiot and forgot to do that earlier... but even with that multiplier, he's still stuck at a max frequency of 2.65. If I try to hit 300 FSB, the system won't even boot into Windows. I ran Orthus for about 20 minutes before I lost patience, but it seems stable enough for now.
Rachel Fox4 Rachel Fox4 Member
12 messages
joined Apr 2009
#2484 ·
When I was originally reading through the reviews, they all claimed that every single unit tested pushed past 400, making the motherboard a total best buy.

I used to pull similar numbers myself back when I was running my own stress tests. Now that I've seen these screenshots, I really need to set aside some time one day to try it out myself.
neonowl67 neonowl67 Newcomer
2 messages
joined Nov 2021
#2485 ·
Edward Peterson70 said:When I was digging through the reviews, the consensus seemed to be that every single unit they tested pushed past the 400 mark, making the board an absolute steal.

I followed that same logic when I was running my own stress tests back in the day, but looking at these screenshots now, it’s a different story entirely. I'll need to dedicate some time to run my own benchmarks to see what's actually happening under the hood.

That's true; I didn't encounter any major red flags either, unless my memory serves me right regarding those issues with the F5 BIOS version...

So, what kind of CPU and RAM combo were you running when you hit that 252 ceiling?
Rachel Fox4 Rachel Fox4 Member
12 messages
joined Apr 2009
#2486 ·
Athlon 3800 + x2

I managed to snag some Kingmax RAM, and honestly, it's performing quite well. I have it running at 960MHz with timings of 3-3-3-9 at 1.96v.
driftingjackal18 driftingjackal18 Newcomer
2 messages
joined Jul 2008
#2487 ·
Here are my current specs:

AMD Athlon x2 5000+ Black Edition 2.66 GHz (clocked at 3.3 GHz)
GIGABYTE MA-M565-s3 nforce 5
8 GB Kingmax DDR2 800 MHz (clocked at 970 MHz)
GeForce 8800 GTX
HIPER 630 W power supply
160 GB Hitachi hard drive

Everything runs perfectly smoothly, and I haven't run into any issues while overclocking.😲😲😲😲😲😲😲😲😲
copperbison copperbison Newcomer
1 message
joined Jul 2008
#2488 ·
I just don't see the logic in grabbing 8GB of RAM when Windows XP or Windows Vista 32-bit (which I'm assuming is what you're running) can only actually utilize about 3.3 GB at most.
A Anonymous Veteran
3.6K messages
joined May 2005
#2489 ·
Honestly, grabbing 8 GB just isn't worth the money right now; nobody can actually make good use of that much memory anyway.

I don't really know the first thing about overclocking, so could someone walk me through how that's even done (especially when it comes to GPUs)?
Rachel Fox4 Rachel Fox4 Member
12 messages
joined Apr 2009
#2490 ·
Anonymous said:Getting 8 GB isn't worth it; nobody can actually make good use of it.

image
Megan Ruiz13 Megan Ruiz13 Active Member
79 messages
joined Apr 2016
#2491 ·
Quick question: if you were looking to overclock a Q6600—aiming for 3.4 GHz or maybe even higher—which of these boards would you pick?

http://www.starbucks.com/description/item/031746

http://www.microcenter.com/product/details...&Sifra=1010087

http://www.microcenter.com/product/details...&Sifra=1010132

Does the X48 chipset offer any real edge over the X38 when it comes to overclocking?

Thanks in advance for any advice. 🙂
A Anonymous Veteran
3.6K messages
joined May 2005
#2492 ·
Edward Peterson70, I’m not trying to get into a numbers game here—like, if I have 42 posts and you’ve got over 3,000, it’s pretty obvious who’s been around the block more, haha—but seriously, can someone please explain how to overclock?
Rachel Fox4 Rachel Fox4 Member
12 messages
joined Apr 2009
#2493 ·
Anonymous said:Edward Peterson70, I am not trying to make any bets here (for instance, if I have 42 posts and you have 3,324, it is quite obvious who has more experience, haha), but could someone please explain how one goes about overclocking?

Simply go to Google, type in "overclocking," and see what comes up.
Rachel Fox4 Rachel Fox4 Member
12 messages
joined Apr 2009
#2494 ·
It isn't actually that complicated. If you just follow a specific sequence, you won't run into any issues. 😉

Identify your maximum FSB and your peak memory frequency first, then proceed to overclock the processor. Just make sure you keep a close eye on your temperatures.

That is basically the whole process. ☕
A Anonymous Veteran
3.6K messages
joined May 2005
#2495 ·
But I don't actually have any temperature monitoring software installed. If you guys know of any good ones, could you drop a link? (Ideally something with a small file size so I can download it easily over my data plan, though I should be able to pull it down eventually)
Rachel Fox4 Rachel Fox4 Member
12 messages
joined Apr 2009
#2496 ·
Core Temp

(Google)
A Anonymous Veteran
3.6K messages
joined May 2005
#2497 ·
I downloaded everything and followed all the steps, but as soon as I clicked the icon, my antivirus popped up asking if I wanted to allow or deny the action. I hit deny, and then it just threw an error message at me. Attempt #2: I let the antivirus through, thinking whatever happens, happens, but then I got this message saying: "This is not an Intel Core architecture-based processor. This program will not continue."
I'm totally lost here. Can anyone recommend a different program (please include a direct download link!) or tell me how to fix this issue?
Just for context—I'm running a Pentium 4 processor, so maybe that's the problem. I also grabbed version 0.98 or something along those lines, though I can't remember the exact version number right now.
Daniel Nguyen3 Daniel Nguyen3 Newcomer
1 message
joined Sep 2008
#2498 ·
Download Everest
Just a heads-up: CoreTemp doesn't actually work on older processors
Also, if you're already running an older CPU, is overclocking even worth your time? You really aren't going to see much of a performance boost
wiredmarlin5 wiredmarlin5 Newcomer
2 messages
joined Apr 2009
#2499 ·
Gary Anderson38 said:I have just one little question for you all... out of this specific selection of motherboards, which one would you personally grab if the main goal was to get a really solid overclock on a Q6600? I’m dreaming big here, aiming for that sweet spot of 3.4 GHz or maybe even pushing a bit higher if the hardware can actually handle it... what do you think?

I was just scrolling through some old listings on Starbucks the other day—you know how those sites can be, just a massive rabbit hole of random items—and I stumbled upon this particular little gem that really caught my eye... It’s one of those vintage tech finds that makes you feel like you've discovered buried treasure from a bygone era! It's an old-school setup, specifically looking at a system running on a Pentium 4, which honestly brings back so many memories of those early 2000s computing days when everything felt so much more tangible... It’s listed as having a celeron 2.81, though if we're being technical about the specs, we're really talking about that classic Pentium 4 era performance that used to be the gold standard in our homes and offices back then. And oh, it's running Windows Server 2003! Can you believe we actually used server-grade operating systems for our little home projects? It feels like a lifetime ago, doesn't it? There's just something so nostalgic about seeing these specific components grouped together, almost like looking at a time capsule of American computing history... It really makes you wonder how far we've come since those chunky towers and the hum of the cooling fans filling up a quiet room on a Sunday afternoon... Anyway, I just thought it was worth sharing for anyone else out there who gets a little thrill from seeing these legacy machines resurface in the wild!

I was just browsing through some technical specifications online today—you know how I get when I start falling down those deep rabbit holes of component data—and I stumbled upon this particular listing for a piece of hardware that really caught my eye! It’s one of those detailed product pages where you can see every little nuance of the build, and honestly, looking at these specs makes me feel a bit nostalgic for the older days of computing, even if we have much more powerful machines now... though, of course, nothing ever quite beats the simplicity of the classics, right? Anyway, I thought it might be worth sharing with the group because there's something quite fascinating about the way these specific parts are laid out, almost like looking at a blueprint for a different era of technology altogether... it really makes you wonder how far we've come since the days of running basic tasks on a Pentium 4, doesn't it? It's just one of those things that keeps me tinkering and thinking about the evolution of our gear!

I was just browsing through some technical specifications online the other day—you know how I get when I stumble upon a deep dive into hardware components—and I came across this particular entry that really caught my eye, though I must say, navigating these kinds of technical databases can sometimes feel like wandering through a labyrinth without a map... but anyway, I found myself looking at the details for this specific component, which seems to be a pretty standard piece of kit if you're working within certain industrial or specialized computing environments here in the States. It’s one of those things where you start reading about one spec, then suddenly you're ten minutes deep into wondering how much processing power you actually need for a modern workstation versus an older legacy system, especially when you consider how far we've come since the days of the Pentium 4 era! It's truly fascinating how these little pieces of hardware hold everything together, even if they aren't exactly flashy or something you'd see in a high-end gaming rig, but for the right application, they are absolutely essential... I suppose I should have shared my thoughts on the compatibility side of things sooner, but I got a bit carried away with the sheer nostalgia of seeing such specific part numbers listed out like that...

I was just sitting here thinking about those old motherboard chipsets, wondering if anyone else spends way too much time obsessing over the tiny technical differences between them... specifically when you're looking at whether the X48 actually gives you a meaningful edge over the X38 if you're planning on pushing your overclocking limits a bit further... It’s one of those deep dives that can really pull you down a rabbit hole, isn't it? I mean, on paper, the X48 certainly looks like the heavyweight champion of that era, especially regarding how it handles memory frequencies and overall stability under heavy loads, which is basically the holy grail for any enthusiast trying to squeeze out every last drop of performance from their rig... But then again, sometimes you have to wonder if the extra effort and the potentially higher price tag are truly worth it, or if the X38 is already more than enough to hit those sweet spots we all dream about... It really comes down to how far you want to push things, I suppose...

I am just so incredibly grateful for any and all advice you might be willing to share... 🙂

Every single P45, X38, or X48 board out there can actually push past that 3.6GHz mark if you're running a quad-core, though the real kicker—the thing that really determines your ceiling—is whether you've managed to snag a B3 or a G0 quad... so it all comes down to that bit of luck with the silicon, I suppose... If I were in your shoes, looking to get the most bang for my buck, I’d say look for a budget-friendly X38 motherboard, maybe something from DFI you could pick up at a local Starbucks or similar shop, just to get things moving... $367 I mean, honestly, I’ve been sitting here mulling it over for ages, just weighing my options between that massive 45GB capacity on the P45 or perhaps going with something from Asus... it's quite the dilemma, really, though both have their own certain charms if you think about it long enough...
A Anonymous Veteran
3.6K messages
joined May 2005
#2500 ·
I've got a Pentium 4 2.81GHz lying around—thinking there might be some cool projects I could pull off with this thing

You must log in or register to reply here.

Log in Register

🔗 Similar threads