Jump to content


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

About Vulkanonistix

  • Rank
  1. I do no have the premier edition, I only have the performance edition that is not overclocked. Thank you guys for stopping by and checking my mod.
  2. Recently, I purchased a Cool Drive 3 for the hard drive that was sitting at the base, now everything is complete with installed 2 120 mm at the front as intake and a hard drive cooler at the drive bay. I am happy with my mod.
  3. I think you could brake your set of ram at 2.9 volts because I have the exact same one that I bought for around 120 dollars and it doesn't overclock well with less voltage. I check to see if the ram is stable by launching either 3dmark03 or 3dmark05 to see if there is any flickering when the application is launching. I also test to see if it completes without stutter. When I raise mine to 230 MHz, it often flickers and reboots in the middle of testing. The voltage I used was 2.71. Also, these ram do not perform well at very high voltages. I think you found your moderate and stable point. I would never give 2.9 volts on any non-TCCD infineon chips.
  4. I am really curious to know this because I can only run my venice at 2.5 at 1.63 volts and runs perfectly at 2.4 GHz. I know I want to use this cpu for a full year until my next birthday. I just want to know if it will fry the cpu at any point.
  5. That is good to hear and I will be looking forwared for the pictures.
  6. I'll be looking forward to seeing your mod. I will post new pictures after I installed additional 120 mm and the hard drive cooler for the hdd that sits at the base of my case.
  7. You definitely beat my Venice 3200 which can't even be prime stable at 1.7 volts (running 2.6 GHz)! Imagine that. So I backed it down to 2.5 GHz which is the highest stable overclock at 1.6 volts. However I only run for test purpose. Right now I am running stock. I see no point or benefit in overclocking yet because games like Quake 4 and COunter-Strike Source all run smooth on my 7800 GT. However, when I tried Ultra Quality in Quake 4 story mode, I started to lag a bit by bit probably due to lack of more memory. Current games are starting to become more nad more memory hungry, especially Battlefield 2.
  8. Yes agreed it was the most annoying fan in the case and I am very happy someone else also did the similar mod. Can you by any chance post some pictures of your rig?
  9. I am pretty sure you have come across my thread under modifications called "Cheap Case, Cool Mods". By doing the mod by basically slapping a Cooler Master fanless heatsink that is a little shorter than the zalman, I saw incredible temperature decrease. The chipset idles at 33 degrees. Under load at prime95 stress testing is only 35 or 36 degrees. Here is the link to the thread http://www.dfi-street.com/forum/showthread.php?t=36087.
  10. You must have overvolted the cpu or cpu just died? You seem to have deffective motherboard. I would return both just as my advice.
  11. Basically what I did is I installed two 120 mm fans in he front as intake and 92 mm at the back. The original case cannot fit any 120 mm, it only fits up to 4 80 mm. Secondly, I made a silent cooling solution for the chipset.
  12. I am wondering, do you think this new bios update would make my CPU oc better and be stable than before? Secondly, I am glad someone noticed that there aren't any temperature changes because I still had doubts about this revision. You see, I am trying to get my Amd 64 3200+ Venice to at least 2.6 GHz without using 1.72 volts. Even with that amount of volts it is unstable and dangerous. I believe the highest this CPU can go is 2.6 unstable. But the highest stable clock I can run with this cpu is 2.5 Ghz with 1.6 volts. I am curious about the Enhanced Memory Support feature because the divider could be causing this unstable overclock since my CPU did not seem to like certain dividers when I tested them.
  13. With all those hard drives, there would be much noise especially if they are 7200 rpm or above. My Caviar SE still creates a lot of vibration.
  14. Well, if you want to achieve more MHz for the CPU, you would want to increase the FSB more and lower the CPU multiplier this way, you can get to stable and higher MHz since you are overclocking the CPU externally by having larger FSB. However, if you leave the multiplier to stock and increase the FSB, you are achieving overclock internally with the multiplier untouched. I guess to you, the increased FSB overclock is better if you find that your memory is stable with the suitable divider. I think this is the most important overclocking concept of AMD 64 CPUs: (From Hardware Secrets website) Athlon 64’s, as well as all current processors, allow you to make overclock easily, by increasing their external clock – provided that your motherboard has this type of configuration, of course. In the tests we carried out on several Athlon 64 motherboards, we increased the external clock of this processor from 200 MHz to something between 223 and 226 MHz, depending on the motherboard. This made the internal clock of the Athlon 64 3200+ we used in our tests go from GHz to something between 2.23 GHz and 2.26 GHz, an increase between 11.5% and 13% in the processor internal clock, not bad at all! The big difference between the Athlon 64 and the other processors we have today is that it has no protection against "underclocking". This is how things are: all current processors are protected against clock multiplier overclocking. For instance, the Athlon 64 3200+ works internally at 2 GHz multiplying its external clock (200 MHz) by 10. There is no way to increase this multiplier to 11 and make the processor work at 2.2 GHz, for example. However, this processor does not have any protection for the configuration of a clock multiplier below the manufacturer value (10x in the case of the Athlon 64 3200+). Reducing the clock multiplier will allow you to increase the processor external clock even more. But to do this, your motherboard must have the clock multiplication configuration in its setup, and few Athlon 64 boards have it. We did several tests using an Albatron K8X800 Pro II motherboard that has that function. Without overclocking, the computer obtained 6,458 points in PCMark2002 (http://www.futuremark.com) and 372.8 FPS in Quake III. With the multiplier in its official configuration (10x) we elevated the processor external clock to 223 MHz (2,230 MHz internally), and the computer obtained 7,193 points in PCMark2002 and 413,4 pictures per second in Quake III, an increase of 11.38% and 10.89% respectively in comparison to the performance obtained when the processor was working at the manufacturer’s configurations. We lowered the clock multiplier in our Athlon 64 from 10x to 9.5x and thus elevated the processor external clock to 236 MHz (2,242 MHz internally), and the computer obtained 7,231 points in PCMark2002 and 413,8 pictures per second in Quake III, a performance increase of 11.97% and 11.00% respectively. We tried to lower the clock multiplier to 9x, but in that configuration the maximum we reached was 225 MHz externally (2,025 MHz internally), which made the performance be similar to the one the processor has when it works at its standard configuration. When we further lowered the clock multiplier to 8,5x, we had the biggest external clock we could with an Athlon 64 up until now: 239 MHz. However, since the multiplier was 8.5x, the internal clock was 2,031.5 MHz, which made the performance of the machine be similar to the one the processor has when it works at the manufacturer’s specification. Based on our experiments, the best overclocking configuration for the Athlon 64 seems to be reducing its clock multiplier by 0.5x and have the most external clock possible.
  15. Wow, really, I guess I am not the only one with this issue. However, I think I made a breakthrough just now, the problem with my oc was due to this - the CPU Spread Spectrum was enabled and most importantly, the CPU Thermal Throttling was at 50%. I disabled both, now my chip can run 2.4 @ 1.42. However, I am going to push the oc a little further to see how stable it will be compared to last time. At this rate, I can definitely oc this to at least 2.6 @ about 1.57 volts. I have one question to you guys, do you like to overclock the CPU internally by leaving the CPU's multiplier at stock and increasing the FSB OR externally by lowering the multiplier and tweaking the FSB at greater numbers? I think overclocking externally would not benefit you with more performance compared to CPU internally but you have lower chance of instability. What do you guys think?
  • Create New...