Jump to content

Help Save Xp!!!


DLS2008

Recommended Posts

it is pointless...

can you grasp the concept that my PC is stable at 4GHZ in XP?

ok...

now that you may have gotten your head around this fact.

it will not boot to blanking Vista at that clock.

man i can tell you are from Clemson...

you studying tractors?

 

BTW i am a redneck from North Augusta...

just so you know that is not a yankee comment...rofl

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Replies 135
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

If it won't boot Vista it's not stable. Period. Software does not affect overclocking at all.

That's about the most ridiculous thing about OCing I've heard in a long time! What a load of rubbish Waco! Of course software affects the OC, it determines for example whether your 3GHz is stable or not. Lets take it away from the OS level but down to a software level in XP for now. You run your SuperPI 32M test, it passes fine. The software has passed the test, you're thinking cool, maybe it's Prime95 stable as well? Nope, that fails after 20 seconds. EXACTLY the same thing with Vista vs. XP! Vista is your Prime95 and XP is your SuperPI 32M, one uses less resources at booting, does fine. The other needs much more to boot, not fine!

 

Hope you got it into your Vista-loving head now :P

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

And by the way Puck are you actually serious about Win98? You keep bringing it up and about the only thing I can think of worse than 98 was ME so where you are getting this 98 is better than XP or Vista idea from is beyond my understanding.

The only time I brought up win98 was after a comment was made to the affect of "if I want performance why don't I just go back to 98" or "Why did I upgrade to XP from 98 then". I simply defended my reasoning, and I never once said the archaic 98 was superior to anything :rolleyes: .

 

You cannot compare going from 98 to XP(which can be made to perform and look like 98) in the same field as XP to Vista(which as of now cannot and will not perform the same). That should not be used as an argument since they are totally different situations.

 

About the OCing, it seems that casual overclockers are confusing their 24/7 clocks with benchmarkers runs. Overall system stability is a moot point - I want the OS to run the bench at the highest clocks the bench can finish at, with no regard to how long it can run like that or what other programs it runs. I do not want my OS to decide not to boot 500mhz shy or benchmark stable clocks for no clear reason.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

On an unrelated note, Rehit, please use paragraphs! B:)

 

Also, regardless of what anyone thinks of Vista, I can't wait until customers stop asking me if Vista is fixed yet. It is driving me nuts. What's worse is that most of them have only heard rumors and think that there are no bugs left in XP - can anyone say SP3? Please people!

 

/end rant

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

it is pointless...

can you grasp the concept that my PC is stable at 4GHZ in XP?

ok...

now that you may have gotten your head around this fact.

it will not boot to blanking Vista at that clock.

man i can tell you are from Clemson...

you studying tractors?

 

BTW i am a redneck from North Augusta...

just so you know that is not a yankee comment...rofl

Computer engineering if you must know (IE: I know a little bit about computers and hardware...architecture is my focus area). Your computer is not stable if it runs XP but crashes in Vista. The hardware is not stable. Period. There's no question about it.

 

That's about the most ridiculous thing about OCing I've heard in a long time! What a load of rubbish Waco! Of course software affects the OC, it determines for example whether your 3GHz is stable or not. Lets take it away from the OS level but down to a software level in XP for now. You run your SuperPI 32M test, it passes fine. The software has passed the test, you're thinking cool, maybe it's Prime95 stable as well? Nope, that fails after 20 seconds. EXACTLY the same thing with Vista vs. XP! Vista is your Prime95 and XP is your SuperPI 32M, one uses less resources at booting, does fine. The other needs much more to boot, not fine!

 

Hope you got it into your Vista-loving head now :P

...what? You realize that stability is entirely independent from the software being run...right?

 

If your computer isn't stable for every piece of software you run on it it's not stable at all. Just because something that's less demanding will run without problems for a while doesn't mean that the hardware is stable. Once the hardware is stable you can run anything you want on it and it'll do it 24/7 for years on end. If it's not stable it's not stable...some software is more lenient than others but that doesn't mean it's not going to crash eventually. The operating system has nothing to do with it. The software has nothing to do with it. If the hardware isn't stable at X speed it'll never run stable at X speed. Period.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Jesus Christ you're stubborn! :rolleyes: What determines whether an OC is table to you? Right, the software that you test the OC with! There is different grades of stability, obviously determined by which program you run. SuperPI stable is close to unstable whilst OCCT stable is already pretty good. Your hardware can be OCCT stable at a given speed, however it is not prime stable there, which does NOT mean that is not stable at all. Of course the software has things to do with it, for example when you put more stress on the CPU (like Prime95), then more errors return, as there are more calculations being done. When only putting 'light' load on the CPU (games, SuperPI etc), it might never reach the point of instability.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Jesus Christ you're stubborn! :rolleyes: What determines whether an OC is table to you? Right, the software that you test the OC with! There is different grades of stability, obviously determined by which program you run. SuperPI stable is close to unstable whilst OCCT stable is already pretty good. Your hardware can be OCCT stable at a given speed, however it is not prime stable there, which does NOT mean that is not stable at all. Of course the software has things to do with it, for example when you put more stress on the CPU (like Prime95), then more errors return, as there are more calculations being done. When only putting 'light' load on the CPU (games, SuperPI etc), it might never reach the point of instability.

I think we're arguing different things.

 

Hardware stability and software stability are two very different things. Some things stress hardware more than others...but just because it runs stable on one platform does not mean it's stable on all platforms.

 

You can pick software that'll allow your hardware to run acceptably most of the time but that's not the same thing as saying it's stable. Stable (in terms of hardware) means that it's 100% stable for any kind of command regardless of what is running on it. I use the latter and test to the best of my ability before I'll call something stable. For some being able to POST is stable. For some being able to boot XP is stable. For some being able to run SuperPI 32m is stable. For some being able to run anything you can possibly think of for an arbitrary amount of time is stable. I fall into the latter category (as much as I can). I'll test to the best of my ability and if something fails it's the hardware's fault, not the software's.

 

 

Blaming Vista for hardware errors is naive at best.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Jesus Christ you're stubborn! :rolleyes: What determines whether an OC is table to you? Right, the software that you test the OC with! There is different grades of stability, obviously determined by which program you run. SuperPI stable is close to unstable whilst OCCT stable is already pretty good. Your hardware can be OCCT stable at a given speed, however it is not prime stable there, which does NOT mean that is not stable at all. Of course the software has things to do with it, for example when you put more stress on the CPU (like Prime95), then more errors return, as there are more calculations being done. When only putting 'light' load on the CPU (games, SuperPI etc), it might never reach the point of instability.

You do realize that everything you're arguing is actually helping mine and waco's case, right? What you're basically saying is Vista is like any other software, and if your OC doesn't work with it, then you haven't found a stable OC.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You do realize that everything you're arguing is actually helping mine and waco's case, right? What you're basically saying is Vista is like any other software, and if your OC doesn't work with it, then you haven't found a stable OC.

Exactly! Vista is software. Stability is entirely independent of software. IE: Vista can't effect stability in any way.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I already have a B.Eng in Computer Systems Engineering, which also included Computer Architecture, VLSI design, etc etc, and Waco is right (for once, unlikes his damn onboard audio theories.... :P)

 

What reason could you possibly give for Vista not being able to boot at 4GHz? It's scared of the speed? :lol:

 

On topic, if you want XP, buy it now and shut up about it (or don't cry if you leave it too late and can't buy it)... Vista SP1 is out soon, (codename?) Vienna is supposedly coming next year, probably before all the available XP licenses in the world have been bought...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

since i do not have a degree, i cannot tell you why.

i am not having an argument about stablilty...

i can clock my PC to 4 GHZ, boot into XP. and run all my benchmarks.

i can then boot to Vista and the boot will fail.

the only thing that has changed is booting to Vista.

i will concede the fact that this does mean the PC is not "Vista" stable, but will not accept it is not "Vista's" fault.

it seems quite logical to me that Vista is failing, not my PC.

running anything but "Vista" should be a clue.

i can back off the overclock and Vista will boot.

since i am trying to overclock my PC this naturally results in me rejecting Vista as a tool to use while doing it.

it may be good for some things but it sucks as an overclockers OS.

the only reason it is even on my PC is because i cannot run CrossfireX without it.

all the science in the world will not change the fact that XP will run everything at a clockspeed that Vista won't even boot at.

now that we have determind this is a cold hard fact...

you guys have the degrees, try to explain why.

 

i do not use paragraphs because i do not use caps.

this causes everything to run together and makes it hard for me to read.

being a toolmaker for 35 years has left me almost blind.

besides...

i cannot type for crap... :lol:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Please sign in to comment

You will be able to leave a comment after signing in



Sign In Now

×
×
  • Create New...