mulitpliers on core 2 duo

Yep.

On some motherboards, they are downwards unlocked, but only with some extreme processors are they upwards unlocked.
 
So, I would be safe moving the FSB from 1066 to 1100? And get what external speed? I have no idea how to do the math on this, help?

Thanks
 
Your fsb isn't really 1066 it's 1066/4=266.5. 266.5 x 9=2.4Ghz for the e6600. So upping your fsb by 44/4=11 276.5 x 9= 2.49Ghz. I think :)
 
Okay so where did you get the 4(in 1066/4), what variable is that? Are all CPU's FSB divided by 4?

Why do they say the FSB is 1066 when it's really not?
 
Last edited:
Wait, i'm confused lol. OKay, maybe i'll ask an overclocking question in this too.
Since the multipliers are locked, how exactly will i go about overclocking an e620? It will have a core clock that i can increase... and that's it? So if i increase the core clock (fsb??) by .07, it will actually increase the overall clock by .49?
 
ezefosure said:
Wait, i'm confused lol. OKay, maybe i'll ask an overclocking question in this too.
Since the multipliers are locked, how exactly will i go about overclocking an e620? It will have a core clock that i can increase... and that's it? So if i increase the core clock (fsb??) by .07, it will actually increase the overall clock by .49?
Click to expand...

Assuming it has a 9x multiplier yes, there are other things you can change that will help you up the fsb such as vcore, ram ratio, etc.
INTELCRAZY said:
Thanks Froboy
Click to expand...

No problem, I haven't overclocked myself(damn you HP...) but I know about it.

INTELCRAZY said:
Okay so where did you get the 4(in 1066/4), what variable is that? Are all CPU's FSB divided by 4?

Why do they say the FSB is 1066 when it's really not?
Click to expand...

I think it's called qaud-pumped or something to that effect, It's not variable but I'm not sure if every processor has that exact number.
 
Last edited:
Yea, basically. Increasing the core speed by .07 ghz would increase the overall speed by .49 after the 7x multiplier?

But i'm confused. I thought that the main things to oc were the multiplier and the core clock. What else is there. Certainly the fsb plays a role, right? (sorry for sounding so noob. i have three IBMs in the house so i've never actually tried ocing, although i have read up on it many times. i guess i didnt understand anything i read after all...)
 
Oh Ghz, I thought you were saying Mhz, :rolleyes: You probably won't be able to OC an IBM, computer manufacturer's lock the BIOS on their PCs. I still don't understand what you are saying, what is the external speed you are wanting to OC to?

you must be rounding your decimals differently? Yeah it would be something in that area, I finally understand.
 
Last edited:
ezefosure said:
Yea, basically. Increasing the core speed by .07 ghz would increase the overall speed by .49 after the 7x multiplier?
Click to expand...

7x Multi, I still don't see how you guys are getting those numbers with this.

I get 128Mhz from the OC

1066+70=1136 1136/4=284 284*7=1988 1988-1860=128, guessing that he is talking about the 6320 with 1.86Ghz
 
Last edited:
Yea. I know IBMs cant overclock. ANd manufactures do tat so instead of making the computer you already have better for free, you have to go out and buy a brand new computer. Its to perpetuate the consumption of duragoods (or whatever they are called, oods that last a long time) instead of squeezing life out of it when it starts to become obselete.

Anyway, intel, could you explain your method of figuring out the overclock? Im starting to think i have to re-read overclocking material since i actually dont understand...
 
INTELCRAZY said:
7x Multi, I still don't see how you guys are getting those numbers with this.

I get 128Mhz from the OC

1066+70=1136 1136/4=284 284*7=1988 1988-1860=128, guessing that he is talking about the 6320 with 1.86Ghz
Click to expand...

I was going by a 9...athough I'm not sure why and I was adding the 70 Mhz to the core clock which adds 490 Mhz to the external clock
 
ok. i dont understand what intel is doing tho.

and to fro, i was getting 490 because 70x7=490. why would it only get 490 with a 9x multiplier?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top