Overclocking (Main Thread)

It looks to me like you overclocked your CPU, and now it’s actually slowing things down. My advice? Don't touch the memory clock in the BIOS; just leave it set to "by SPD." That way, your RAM runs at 200x2 (400) MHz. Instead, try increasing the processor clock gradually, and make sure you run stability tests every single time to ensure everything stays steady. If your memory speed is tied directly to the processor clock, it's likely dropping to 166x2 (333) MHz, which is causing the slowdown because your motherboard probably doesn't support asynchronous operation.
Since you're running a Barton 2500, I'd honestly suggest not touching anything unless you are 100% certain of what you're doing. You risk frying the chip, or worse, taking out everything on the motherboard. Because the Barton has a locked multiplier, cranking up the clock speed usually bumps up the PCI Express bus speeds as well. As I mentioned before, the only way to truly unlock that multiplier is by bridging the L1 and L2 contacts on the processor using a thin wire and a soldering iron.

hollowjackal13 said:From what I can gather, you’ve bumped up the processor clock and now everything feels sluggish. Don't touch the memory timings in the BIOS; leave them set to "by SPD" so your RAM stays at 200x2 (400) MHz. Just incrementally increase the processor speed and make sure to run stability tests. If your memory frequency is tied directly to the processor bus, it drops to 166x2 (333) MHz, which is why things are slowing down—your motherboard likely doesn't support asynchronous operation.
Since you're running a Barton 2500, my advice is to leave it alone unless you are absolutely certain of your next move. You risk frying the chip, or worse, taking out the entire motherboard with you. When you crank up that bus speed, you're almost certainly pushing the PCI and AGP buses along with it. Because the Barton has a locked multiplier, the only way to actually unlock it is to bridge the L1 and L2 contacts on the processor itself using a fine soldering iron and a thin wire.

I actually looked into that; within MSI Afterburner, you can theoretically set the PCI to 33 MHz and the AGP to 66 MHz independently of the main bus. I was being careful about that, so don't worry. 😉
When the memory is set to "by SPD," it sits at 200x2 even when the FSB is at 166. However, once I start pushing the FSB, the memory frequency climbs well beyond 400. If I switch from "by SPD" to 100%, the memory effectively runs at the FSB x2 frequency. To bring the memory back down to a steady 200x2, I would have to lower the FSB, which would then drop the processor to 2.2GHz. The problem is I hit a blue screen at just 2.035 GHz. It seems there is no real benefit to overclocking the FSB here because the memory ends up performing slower in relation to the CPU. I'm not sure exactly how much performance I'm losing, but I refuse to put in all this effort for half-baked results; I'd rather just leave everything exactly as it was.

So, judging by the situation, the only real solution would be to adjust the CPU multiplier instead of the FSB (while keeping the memory locked at 200x2). But I don't own a precision micro-soldering station, nor do I have the practical experience to pull it off. Besides, I really don't feel like pulling the processor out just to hand it over to a friend, risking a total disaster if we slip up. It isn't that I don't understand the theory, but one wrong move while handling the hardware and you've permanently damaged the component.

As I mentioned earlier, you really can't go wrong by keeping the FSB and memory at a 1:1 ratio. Based on the benchmarks I've run myself, that's where the system performs most reliably. If you bump up the FSB in the BIOS while leaving the memory set at 100%, you'll consistently maintain that 1:1 ratio.
Using SPD simply means the memory will default to the exact settings hardcoded into the memory chip, just as you noted. If you select SPD, the memory will always run at its rated speed, which for PC3200 would be 400MHz.

wanderingbadger16 said:As I have maintained previously, the optimal approach is to maintain a 1:1 ratio between the FSB and the memory, based on my own testing where system stability and performance peaked. By increasing the FSB within the BIOS, provided the memory is set to 100%, you will invariably achieve that 1:1 ratio.
Using SPD means the memory defaults to the specific parameters hardcoded into its chip, just as you noted. If you select SPD, the memory will consistently run at its rated speed—which, for PC3200, is 400MHz.

Hmm, are you suggesting that running at FSB 166 with 333 memory (100%) actually outperforms FSB 166 with 400 memory (via SPD)?

I should note that when I accessed the BIOS, selected memory by SPD, and then attempted to bump the multiplier using MSI Afterburner (from 166 to 171), MSI Afterburner indicated the memory frequency would jump from 400 to 410. I didn't hit the "GO" button, so the changes weren't applied, but it proves that selecting "by SPD" doesn't guarantee the memory stays locked at 400...
That is precisely my dilemma. Ideally, I would lock the memory at 400 while pushing the processor as high as possible, but I am not entirely confident in the quality of my RAM and I am loath to risk a total system failure.

The underlying motivation for this entire endeavor is simply to squeeze every last possible frame out of Oblivion; I am rapidly approaching the lower limit of playable framerates when running high settings, HDR, and those massive open environments. 😁

Yes, the SPD will set your memory to 400MHz (your BIOS should show "By SPD," meaning the RAM is running at its rated speed of 400MHz). For instance, if you were using 433MHz memory, the SPD would automatically configure it to that specific frequency. On the other hand, if you manually set the memory percentage to 100% of the FSB, then your memory will always run in a 1:1 ratio with the FSB.

wanderingbadger16 said:Correct, the SPD will set your memory to 400MHz—your BIOS will show "By SPD," meaning the RAM is running at its rated speed of 400MHz. If you were using 433MHz RAM, the SPD would target that frequency instead. However, that's a separate issue from manually setting your memory ratio to 100% of the FSB; if you do that, your memory will always run at a 1:1 ratio with the FSB.

That is fine, but you still haven't answered my question regarding:

Hmm, so you're claiming it performs better with an FSB of 166 and memory at 333 (100%), rather than an FSB of 166 and memory at 400 (by SPD)?

If you're interested, I can shoot you an email with the benchmark results I ran using various memory timings and FSB settings so you can draw your own conclusions. <- 1:1 is the optimal setting here
Just make sure you set the SPD to the memory's rated speed.
The answer is YES.

wanderingbadger16 said:If you want, I can email you the benchmark I put together using various memory timings and FSB configurations so you can draw your own conclusions. <- 1:1 is the optimal setting
SPD sets your memory to its rated speed.
The answer is YES.

Feel free to just paste it here instead... My reason for being so verbose regarding my own overclocking experiences is the hope that someone else reading this might find it useful. 😉 But honestly, your word alone is enough for me—if you say 1:1 is best, then 1:1 it is!

So, what should I do? Lock it at 1:1 and then push the FSB as far as it will go? I ran a Sandra Burn-In test, and at FSB 185 MHz, it cleared every single test without a hitch (though once I pushed the FSB to 190 MHz, I hit a blue screen immediately). At 185 MHz, my CPU will sit at 2035 MHz while the memory hits 370... what’s your take on those numbers?

restlesslynx said:You can just paste it right here...

I can't paste it here because the file size is a bit too large, so the system won't let me.

restlesslynx said:So, what if I set it to 1:1 and then just push the FSB as high as it'll go?

Yes.

restlesslynx said:I ran the Sandra burn-in test, and at FSB 185 MHz, it finished all the tests without any errors (once I bumped it up to 190, I hit a blue screen). At 185, my processor will be at 2035 MHz and the memory at 370... what do you think about those numbers?

That seems fine.👍 The main thing is ensuring Windows stays stable. You should probably run a few more benchmarks to really stress the machine and make sure it won't crash on you later.

wanderingbadger16 said:That’s fine.👍 As long as Windows stays stable, you're on the right track; however, I would suggest running a few more benchmarks to really stress the system out just to be certain you won't run into a crash later.

If I take it incredibly slow, making incremental adjustments and proceeding with extreme caution, am I effectively eliminating the risk of burning anything out? I have this lingering gut feeling that overclocking is inherently risky, yet at the same time, I find myself thinking there shouldn't be much danger if I'm constantly monitoring temperatures and following the proper procedures...

Look, just run Prime95 for at least 24 hours straight. If it manages to get through that without a single error, then you know you're actually good to go. 😉

restlesslynx said:If I just nudge the settings up bit by bit and proceed with extreme caution, does that mean there's no real risk of burning anything out? I have this gut feeling that overclocking is inherently risky, but then again, I feel like if you're constantly monitoring temperatures and following the right procedures, it shouldn't be that dangerous...

Look, I'm running a Duron 800 MHz, so logically I should have plenty of incentive to push the clocks, especially since I've got an nforce2 ultra chipset and memory rated at 400MHz. However, I'm choosing not to overclock for two specific reasons:
1. I'm currently using an old cooler—it feels like one meant for a Pentium II—that spins at nearly 5000 RPM. I really don't feel like swapping it out for the new one I already bought just yet, because I'm waiting until I can upgrade to a better processor. Right now, my CPU temperature sits steady at 66°C. For some people, that's what they see when they're overclocking, but for me, it's more like the upper limit where a chip can run for a long, long time without giving up the ghost.
2. Overclocking always carries a degree of risk. Pushing hardware beyond its factory-rated specifications will inevitably shorten its lifespan, and in extreme cases—if someone gets reckless—it can lead to a total system failure.

I actually wanted to try bumping up the memory speed instead, since theoretically (and practically), it could run twice as fast as the bus. My FSB is 100MHz while the memory is 200MHz(400MHz). I didn't manage to pull that off, likely because my motherboard (according to the manual) doesn't support the specific processor I've been using on this board for about two years.
So, my only remaining options are to set the FSB:MEM ratio to:
100MHz:100MHz(200MHz)
100MHz:133MHz(266MHz)
100MHz:166MHz(333MHz)
Out of those three configurations, the first one is actually the fastest. This is due to the synchronized operation of the FSB and memory, and perhaps just as importantly, the lower RAM latencies, which in my case sit at a crazy 2-2-2-4 in that first setting.😁

No123 said:Just run Prime95 for about 24 hours; if it finishes without crashing, you're golden.😉

Hmm, is it actually wise to just leave that running and head to bed? I’d hate for something to fry while I’m asleep.😁

Oh, one more thing... my plan is to only trigger the overclocking for the GPU and CPU when I'm actually gaming—why run them at max speed when there's no reason to? Does that logic hold up?

restlesslynx said:Hmm, is it actually smart to just leave it running and head to bed? What if something decides to fry itself while I'm asleep? 😁

I left mine running for 40 hours straight and nothing blew up. 😉

No123 said:I let mine run for 40 hours straight and didn't run into a single hiccup.😉

I bumped the FSB up to 182 MHz to hit that sweet spot of a round 2 GHz. I've had Prime95 running for about 20 minutes now and everything seems stable—though according to the readme, any potential errors usually pop up within those first few minutes. My CPU temperature has settled at 74C (up from a max of 68C when I'm not overclocking). Is that range acceptable? I suppose if I popped the case open, the temps would drop by maybe 3 or 4 degrees, but then I'd have to deal with the extra fan noise...

Aux1 said:I bumped my FSB to 182 MHz to hit roughly 2 GHz. I've had Prime95 running for about 20 minutes now and everything seems solid (the readme mentions that any potential errors usually pop up within the first few minutes). My CPU temp has leveled out at 74°C (it maxes out at 68°C when it isn't overclocked). Is that range acceptable? Also, if I pop the side panel off the case, the temps drop by about 3-4 degrees, but then the fan noise becomes a real nuisance...

Your CPU temperature is running a bit hot🙂. It sounds like you might have a subpar heatsink or perhaps the thermal application isn't quite right. I'd suggest picking up some high-quality thermal paste and applying a very, very thin layer to both the processor and the heatsink.

That CPU temperature is way too high. I wouldn't dream of touching that setup—get him a decent cooler before he even thinks about gaming.

When I run Geekbench, my temps never even cross 42 degrees.😉

P.S. Just once, Geekbench actually threw an error on me after running for 20 hours straight.😉

wanderingbadger16 said:Your CPU temperature seems a bit high to me🙂. Either your heatsink is subpar or the thermal paste has dried out. Pick up some higher-quality compound and apply a very, very thin layer between the processor and the cooler.

The moment I open the case, it drops to 69 under max load and overclocking🙂
For the past year, this rig has been running practically 24/7 at full tilt running BOINC, with the case closed at 68C, and everything remained perfectly stable.

My cooler is some Spire model; it runs at 2700rpm, it's quite large, and it cost about $33.

Honestly, I don't have the energy to mess around with it anymore. In a few months, I'll have more cash on hand than I do now, and I plan to rebuild the whole system. I won't need to pinch pennies on secondary components like coolers; instead, I'll be picking up something truly high-end. 👍

So, here’s what I’m actually asking you all: should I leave my GPU and CPU overclocked constantly, or just toggle them on when I'm running a demanding game? Personally, the latter seems like the more logical approach to me, but I'm interested in hearing how the rest of you handle it...

restlesslynx said:Look, here's what I'm actually asking—should I run my GPU and CPU overclocked all the time, or just when I'm playing demanding games? Personally, the second option seems like the logical way to go, but I'm curious to see what you guys think...

Regarding the GPU, I bump the clocks up for 3D rendering—in my case, from 500 to 600🙂
For 2D, I stay steady at 300 MHz.
The GPU only jumps to 600 MHz once I actually launch a 3D app (like a game).

As for the CPU, I've no clue—I overclocked it and the temps don't even cross 40 degrees.🙂 🙂