Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Well guys i got this little chip then less then a week ago and ive been tinkering with it in the bios settings.... i have reached 3.0Ghz but idk if its stable or not yet! But its at 1.4vcore and the stock is 1.36vcore sooo i booted up into windows and been playing around for a while so im gunna see if its primeable I SURE DO HOPE SOOOOOOO!!!

 

Overclocked.jpg.xs.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Good luck if you are at 3ghz with just above stock voltage you should have no problem getting it stable.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest drteming

Well here it is, 3159 MHz. The 144 hit the steep part of the voltage to MHz curve at 351 x 9 at 1.65v. It took 1.70v to go 353 x 9 and that only primed for 45 minutes before failing. The Biostar has been retired, though it could be a candidate for a HTPC build.

 

Interesting thing, the 3DMark2001SE score for the Biostar at 3105 MHz and a 6600GT was 22848 . For the Expert at 3159 MHz and a X1950 GT, it was 33503!

 

Now, I thought 3DMark2001SE was dependent on the CPU and not on the GPU, and I don't think 54 MHz and running the RAM at 1T equals an almost 11000 point increase. I ran the benchmark a couple of times to make sure it wasn't a fluke, and it wasn't. Any thought? Am I totally off base?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Interesting thing, the 3DMark2001SE score for the Biostar at 3105 MHz and a 6600GT was 22848 . For the Expert at 3159 MHz and a X1950 GT, it was 33503!

 

With my ICFX3200 @ 3.8hgz & a pair of 6600gt's in SLI I get 40000 points in 3DMARK01 & the same rig with an 8800gts gets 55000 so perhaps it isn't so dependant on the CPU as we think.

 

Regards

 

Craig.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

3D01 is a graphics based benchmark. Not sure where you heard that it was more CPU dependent but it isn't true. Better graphics cards, better 3D bench scores.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest drteming

That's the thing, 3D01 is 6 years old and one would think that the load on a modern GPU would be minimal...I'm gonna run 3DMark99 Max and see :P

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Why would the load be minimal on the graphics card? Sure 3D01 is old and the graphics are less complex, but this means it can just draw more frames per second, yeilding a higher score as you move up in GFX cards.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest drteming

Exactly, therefore the CPU is the bottleneck...wait, I just answered my own question...CPU MHz dependent if the GPU remains the same, duh...

 

BTW, 3DMark99 Max won't even run on my machines. No DirectX 6.1 installed!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hey guys.. I'm trying to figure out the best of rams that I have currently and then to upgrade later to better / faster / more overclokeable ones..

 

AMPO 2x512mb ddr400 cas 2.5.3-3-3-8

Wintec 1gb ddr400 cas 3-3-3-8

Buffalo 2x1gb ddr400 cas 3-3-3-8

 

I want 2gbs.. but is there any difference in having 1gb or 2x512 being better than 2x1gb ? I hope not but I'm new to this..

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


×
×
  • Create New...