Jump to content

- - - - -

WARNING to all Future AMD 64 3200+ Venice Shoppers!

  • Please log in to reply
27 replies to this topic

#25 hawkeyefan



  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 335 posts

Posted 31 December 2005 - 03:16 PM

Um newer dose not mean bad i have an


(AMD Opteron X2 )

it's a GOOD overclocker it's at 2.6GHz .05 volts higher then stock

er...he is talking about a newer Venice

you are giving an example of the best possible stepping of best possible week of Manchester core. not really relevant

that thing will do way higher than 2.6ghz

#26 DublinGunner



  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 92 posts

Posted 01 January 2006 - 06:50 AM

I ended up just doing a high multiplier and 250 FSB (Why do they still call it that for these boards?) which made my RAM end up at 200 MHz on low timings.

I haven't noticed a difference either way... if you're going to make the timings higher for a higher frequency, isn't that just substitution? Angry made a thread about his findings too, which showed little gain to either way as long as he upped the FSB to get a higher CPU OC.

Well something that I've always said too. It the CPU that makes use of the bandwidth, and the higher CPU speed that will make all of the difference.

#27 xgunnas


    New Member

  • Members
  • 37 posts

Posted 01 January 2006 - 08:37 AM

i'll never whine about my chip again (i have b4) after seeing this post, assuming every1 did everything right on this thread on ocing, then bad luck to those who cant clock past 2.5ghz
but is it safe to say that close to all vennys do at least 2.4 since 3500+ does that?

#28 smshpkins


    New Member

  • Members
  • 43 posts

Posted 01 January 2006 - 10:31 AM

I have the exact same issue with my Venice - I just figured that the engineers over at whichever plant pumped mine out refined their production methods. Oh well, at 2.5GHz, it stil beats the hell out of, well, everything on the Intek side; can't complain about that.