Am I Ocing This Setup Right. Looking For Expertise

[clownboy]

Not to sure if I am doing this right. I found a doc that explains how to overclock my motherboard but I'm not sure how accurate it is and if it's right at all.

 

Here's the setup:

Asus P4C800-e Rev 2

P4 3.4 northwood

corsair Twinx PC3200 XL PLatinum (2.2.2.5)

ATI X800 XT Platinum Edition

1x WD raptor 10K 74GB SATA

2x Maxtor Diamondmax 10 300GB SATA

Ultra X-connect POwer supply 500W

Zalman CPU7700 cooler

Artic silver 5

3 x 120mm case fans

 

Here is what my bios settings are at. The system seems to be working without any issues at all:

 

CPU speed 3875 (I can get 3908 but after that xp pretty much fails at logon)

 

CPU External Freq = 228

Dram Freq = 400 mhz (the Doc I used stated that it's better to keep 1:1 ratio. Don't know if this is true or not)

AGP/PCI = 66.66/33/33

CPU Core voltage = 1.575 (it will run wiht the same setting at a lower voltage no differnces)

DDR Refernce Voltage = 2.85v

AGP VDDQ voltage = 1.50

Performance Mode = Turbo

 

Dram CAS Latency = 2.0

DRAM RAS PRecharge = 2

Dram RAS to CAS delay = 3 (system will not run if set to 2)

Dram Precharge Delay = 5

Burst Length = 8

 

Performance Acceleration Mode = Enabled

Dram Idle Timer Infinite

Dram Refresh rate = 64usec (I have used the 7.8 usec, Don't know what the difference is)

 

CPU temps = 35.5 lowest 38 highest. AVerage is definetly around 37 degrees (so the bios says)

 

I'm sort of confused. I have read up on the topic quite a bit and it seems like people are able to get FSB 250 and above with the same setup. I can't go over 230

 

I could run everything as is (and a little more) at the lowest vcore settings which is 1.55. The only reason I have it at 1.57v is becuase I think it should be higher than the lowest. FRom what I've been reading this shouldn't be the case

 

My temperatures never really rise that much. From what I have been reading this shouldn't be the case at all. especially wth just fans

 

According to the doc I used, Even if I used the best memory sticks out there I shouldn't be getting anything less than 3.3.3.6 and be lucky if I got 3.3.3.6. and yet I get 2.2.2.5 once I drop the FSB less than 228.

 

Should I overclock my AGP bus?

 

For some reason, even though it seems like I am overclocked I feel liek It's a hoax and that I'm not actualy doing anything. I feel like I'm doing something wrong. for instance why can't I go over 230 FSB if so many other people are going over 250 etc.

 

ANY help would be GREATLY appreciated.

[Kash]

Well, for starters, you're gonna have to loosen the memory timings to get any significant overclock. The doc you read recommends 3-3-3-6. Those timings are in the right ballpark when overclocking the FSB more than 25 MHz over stock. Fiddle around with it or do some more searches. Tom's Hardware Guide and Adrian's Rojak Pot have some good guides for memory overclocking and tweaking.

 

In response to your AGP question, there is one simple answer if you have an AGP/PCI lock: NO!! Keep it at 66 or 67, do not go any higher. This ensures system stability and there is little to no practical speed increase if you overclock your AGP/PCI bus.

 

The only reason to increase your Vcore is to get really high overclocks. Decent overclocks can be done with no change in the Vcore. It's only when you've achieved mroe than 200 MHz, and you can't get any higher do you actually increase Vcore (generally speaking). Also, if you want to increase Vcore, you HAVE to have good cooling. Plus, increasing Vcore shortens the lifespan of the processor, but that's never usually an issue. Processors are designed to last a good 10 years on stock voltage. Increasing the Vcore modestly only decreases that life span to around 6 or 7 years, far more than what how long you're gonna use the CPU anyway.

Edited January 27, 2005 by kashk5

[clownboy]

Thanks for your feedback

 

So from what your saying it sounds like I am on the right track.

 

The guide I used stated that before I start use the worst memory timings possible and then tighten them as much as they can go until you see that the system is unstable. It just seemed off to me that When I passed the 3.3.3.6 mark the system keppt on running wiithout a hiccup/

 

Here's a good question. How much shuold I be willing to sacrifice with the memory timing? is it worth going with a lower CPU speed but better timings?

 

What should I expect with this type of setup? should it be able to reach 4 Ghz? am I near it's limit?

 

Should I use a 1:1 ratios dram Freq or change to 3:2 Etc.

 

If anybody has any experience with this mobo, CPu and Memory it would be great to hear from you.

 

Thanks again

[Kash]

From what I've been reading, since you have a P4, I'm guessin that you go with the higher clock speed than with tighter timings. You could try both and benchmark it, and decide which one you prefer, since the results will be different in different categories (Multimedia benchmark, memory latency benchmark, etc.)

 

It's ideal to have your memory at a 1:1 ratio, but if you're going for a really high OC, then you might want to change the ratio. What ratio you choose all depends on high you want to OC. I've heard of 3.4 Northwoods getting to 3.8 on good aircooling. You might be able to get higher, but to get to 4 GHz, you will most likely need a watercooling or a phase-changing (REALLY high OC) setup.

[clownboy]

That's what is making me think something is a miss. I am able to get 3.9 without any issues at all only with air cooling. if I go over 3.908 the OS locks. The temperature rises 1 degree max. I left at 3.875 because I figure I shouldn't have any issues what so ever considering that it seems to run fine at 3.9Ghz. For some reason I feel like the bios is lying to me with the CPU speed and temperature especially considering I am only air cooled.

 

The setting are there, From your experieicne your telling me everything looks good. There is nothing i'm missing.

 

1 more question if you don't mind.

 

When I bought the hard drives The plan was to run 1 of them on it's own on the intel raid chip and the other 2 in raid 0 on the promise. but I didn't take into consideration that the promise controller is on the PCI bus which definetly limits bandwidth for SATA. How much of a performance hit could I expect to take if I run the WD raptor on the promise for just OS? This is to be a strict gaming machine for now.

 

Should I just say screw the raid 0 and just run two hard drives on the Intel raid chip instead?

[x2crazy4shadyx]

my dads almost the the same set up but with 2 gigs of the ram and a few other things dont know about t he board but when he overclocks his 3.4 prescott he tryed overclocking it to 4.0 and it dosnt start up 3.95 starts up but dosnt work well 3.895 works prefect dunno id like to see if we can get my dad to 4.0 with watercooling

[Kash]

I have an idea. How about you just hook up the Raptor onto your mobo and the two Maxtors onto the Promise connectors? Keep the OS and any games on the Raptor, and keep all your other stuff on the Maxtors. This way, your OS will load faster, along with your games. You don't need that much bandwidth for mp3s or movies, so the Maxtors should be find on the Promise controller. Plus, it's not THAT much of a performance hit

Edited January 27, 2005 by kashk5

[clownboy]

That was the original plan. The only differnce is that I wanted to separate the os from the games since that all that will be on the box. The plan is to make this plan as much of a toaster as possible, sort of liek an Xbox.

 

I'm thinking, Since this is to be a dedicated game box with nothing else on it, would it make sense to put the OS on the raptor connected to the Promise and the maxtors with the game files in raid 0 on the intel raid chip. If all I'm doing with this box is gaming than most of the HD activity should be coming from the gaming files right, At least it sounds liek that would be the case. I mean how much OS reads could possible be going on besides booting the system. Even then do you think it safe to say that the perfomance hit would be minimal? When playing a game how much activity could a system drive possibly have?

 

P.S. My girlfriend is siting at the other side of the same room as me thinking that I'm in a chat room with some girl having virtual .. If she ONLY knew the truth! boy what guys have to go through these days! ;o)

[Kash]

Keep in mind that no hard drive sustains its max burst speed (ATA133 drives wont sustain 133 MB/s, they'll be far less than that) The same has to do with SATA. SATA drives won't sustain 150 MB/s, regardless of how fast it is. The main benefit to the Raptors is faster response time.

 

Since you want fast load times, RAID 0 is a good idea for games (though it's not VERY noticeable unless you have 2 really fast drives). Like I said before, no hard drive sustains its maximum burst speed, so you probably won't even notice a difference which connector you hook up the drives to. Personally, I'd suggest hooking up the Raptor to the Intel RAID controller and the other drives to the Promise. There will most likely be little to no performance difference, since many people have said that physical PCI controller cards perform on par with onboard SATA controllers.

 

With this setup, you can at least boot the system quickly to start playin all those games!

Edited January 27, 2005 by kashk5

[Pent uP Rage]

up vcore .25-.5V at a time, go with 5/4 div, loosen RAM timings, up AGP voltage to 1.6V, disable "performance mode" it stresses the RAM unneccisarily with little difference in performance.

 

Your temps are good. I believe with the 5/4 divider, you could hit 250Mhz. And THAT would return your RAM speed to stock. 250/200=5/4

And if you have an "AUTO" setting for the RAM try it. You might be surprised. I get my 3.0 to 3.85 w/out having to even touch the RAM timings with Kingston HYPERX PC3200.