Fruiting Windows Repair Screen

Status
Not open for further replies.
D

Deadpool

Active Member
Hi boys!

Here goes the problem:

Whenever I try to get my FSB over 210 MHz, my delicious computer takes me to the Repair Screen of death.

A general idea of my settings:

FSB: 215MHz-220MHz+225MHz (example, doesn´t matter as long as it´s over 210MHz)
NB: 2200MHz (default)
HT: 2400MHz (default)
CPU Clock multiplier: 20 (default)
Disabled all power saving settings, including Turbo (does the same with or without power functions enabled/disabled)
NB Voltage: +0V
CPU Voltage: +0V (Tried up to +0.2V and nothing changed)
RAM Voltage: 1.5V (default)
RAM speed: 1866MHz (default)
RAM timings: No idea (default :p)

Any help will be welcome! Thanks!
 
Last edited by a moderator:
beers

beers

Moderator
Staff member
Why FSB OC instead of multiplier?

You'll need to down ratio NB, HT and DRAM as you pump up the FSB value.
 
D

Deadpool

Active Member
beers said:
Why FSB OC instead of multiplier?

You'll need to down ratio NB, HT and DRAM as you pump up the FSB value.
Click to expand...

Why is that? I know the RAM speed must be lower than the NB, but I didn't know about the other stuff. The reason is I'm following this guide, seems kinda cool:

 
beers

beers

Moderator
Staff member
NB, HT and DRAM utilize the FSB as a reference clock. If you use the same divider while increasing the FSB value you're also overclocking those other components.
 
Darren

Darren

Moderator
Staff member
I'd just mess with multi, it's a whole lot easier and introduces way less variables as @beers mentioned. Have you looked at my OC guide? I wrote it based on the same chip as you so should be able to apply it pretty easily to your setup. If you want to mess with FSB then by all means go ahead, but at least start with multi and maybe tweak FSB slightly when you're done with that. Big gains on FSB just isn't practical really.

Checking your RAM timings and speeds should also be done. My CPU-Z benchmarks went up noticeably from tweaking my RAM and several games were noticeably smoother too. I've tested and overclocked my 8320 pretty extensively so feel free to ask any questions. @beers has too. :D

https://www.computerforum.com/threads/cpu-overclocking-guide-for-unlocked-intel-amd-cpus.238737/
 
D

Deadpool

Active Member
I have tried already OC with the multiplier using your guide (one similar specific to my motherboard). Got 4.6MHz without much trouble (It's not like my motherboardand cooler can take any more than that). Still wanted to try this.

The reason I ask why I should downclock the NB and HT is because my motherboard doesn't use multiplier values for those (x11 and x12 respectively). It just sets the frequencies (at least that's what shows up in BIOS, it just say 2200MHz and 2400MHz). I've downclocked the RAM but why should that be an issue? My RAM as been at 2133MHz without problems in the past, so the ~1960MHz that gets from the FSB OC should not be a problem.
 
Darren

Darren

Moderator
Staff member
It's not so much speed with RAM as stability and latency. I have mismatched kits of RAM and my timings were a mess until I config'd them manually to all match and gave a very slight voltage bump.

What's your CPU-Z benchmark score at 4.6GHz? I'd honestly be surprised if you're truly stable at that speed on that board. It's power delivery isn't ideal as its power phase is 4+1, which basically means it won't be able to provide steady voltage at higher clock speeds. For AM3+ you wants 8+2 ideally but you should still get a moderate overclock on most 4+1 boards. VRM's overheating also commonly causes issue for these chips/boards.
 
D

Deadpool

Active Member
Update:

I've tried downclocking everything else and it does boot to Windows. All this seems kind of pointless since the whole idea around overclocking the FSB is actually to get an overclock out of everything else...

Seems strange since I can't see what could be causing the problem. I mean the FSB at 210MHz would give me this clocks:

RAM: 1960
NB: 2310
HT: 2520

And at 215

RAM: 2005
NB: 2365
HT: 2580

I don't see anything wrong with those numbers. I mean the RAM is lower than the NB, in both cases the NB is over 2300 and in none the HT goes over 2600 (which I've read in the AMD manual that it is the max for this CPUs).

Could it be the NB voltage?

Darren said:
It's not so much speed with RAM as stability and latency. I have mismatched kits of RAM and my timings were a mess until I config'd them manually to all match and gave a very slight voltage bump.

What's your CPU-Z benchmark score at 4.6GHz? I'd honestly be surprised if you're truly stable at that speed on that board. It's power delivery isn't ideal as its power phase is 4+1, which basically means it won't be able to provide steady voltage at higher clock speeds. For AM3+ you wants 8+2 ideally but you should still get a moderate overclock on most 4+1 boards. VRM's overheating also commonly causes issue for these chips/boards.
Click to expand...

It is. In fact there are some nutbags that stress tested this mobo at 5GHz and did well for such a low complexity chipset. I mean this was the cheapest motherboard I could possibly found and it's not that shitty. Never saw any overheating on the core or the socket. Not sure about the VRM.
 
Darren

Darren

Moderator
Staff member
Deadpool said:
It is. In fact there are some nutbags that stress tested this mobo at 5GHz and did well for such a low complexity chipset. I mean this was the cheapest motherboard I could possibly found and it's not that shitty. Never saw any overheating on the core or the socket. Not sure about the VRM.
Click to expand...

Show me some scores, you should be identical to me, if not better in theory since you have faster RAM. Pretty much anything I've ever read or seen doesn't have 4+1 power phase boards pushing these 8 cores that high.
 
D

Deadpool

Active Member
Darren said:
Show me some scores, you should be identical to me, if not better in theory since you have faster RAM. Pretty much anything I've ever read or seen doesn't have 4+1 power phase boards pushing these 8 cores that high.
Click to expand...

I have tried th CPU Z and I get pretty bad scores. Probably because I have 2 firewalls and 3 antivirus running, plus Secunia PSI and the NVidia center. In Passmark I get pretty good scores though. Specially in the single threaded score. I've reached 11k(multi/overall score) and 1.9k (single core). I do not remember exactly since it's been a while since I've done it. I must admit I never stress tested it though, but I've seen people doing it. Maybe all the videos were fake, maybe not.

This Brazilian kid stress tested it at 5GHz for a while:


Dude speaks in Portuguese. I didn't understand shit either.

I never kept it at 4.6 for too long since it would at 40C in idle. A bit too hot for me. And my country is hot as hell so it really doesn't help.

beers said:
That HT is too high. You don't really gain any performance by OCing HT.
Click to expand...

I'll try downclocking the HT, see what happens. Thanks.

PS: I don't know who did that to the title of the thread but it looks sick.
 
johnb35

johnb35

Administrator
Staff member
Deadpool said:
Probably because I have 2 firewalls and 3 antivirus running,
Click to expand...
Only 1 firewall and 1 antivirus program should be installed. They are working against each other and you need to uninstall them so you only have 1 and 1.
 
D

Deadpool

Active Member
johnb35 said:
Only 1 firewall and 1 antivirus program should be installed. They are working against each other and you need to uninstall them so you only have 1 and 1.
Click to expand...

There are not 2 specific programs, it's Comodo and Windows Firewall. Comodo doesn't disable it, so both are running at the same time. By antivirus I mean this:

-Avant as main
-Adaware and Spybot as supports.

Adaware warns you about this so it automatically installs in compatibility mode.
 
D

Deadpool

Active Member
Hi boys. An update here and possible partial solution. As @beers suggested, I down clocked the HT, and I could go further and set the FSB to 215 without problems booting (didn't test it though), so it seems the problem is with related frequencies being too high.

What really confuses me is the repair screen. I mean why does it do that? It's not like I get blue screens ir anything... It just repairs something, as if I had messed with the system files. I'm a bit frustrated here to be honest...
 
Intel_man

Intel_man

VIP Member
If you're talking about the repair screen that shows up before it goes to the windows loading screen and gives you a bunch of repair options, it's because the windows repair screen shows up when you have 2 consecutive unsuccessful startups or experienced consecutive BSODs, hardlocks, or just crashes.
 
D

Deadpool

Active Member
Intel_man said:
If you're talking about the repair screen that shows up before it goes to the windows loading screen and gives you a bunch of repair options, it's because the windows repair screen shows up when you have 2 consecutive unsuccessful startups or experienced consecutive BSODs, hardlocks, or just crashes.
Click to expand...

It never crashes, it just boots the first time and that happens. Still I guess the reason must be that or something very similar. Thanks!
 
D

Deadpool

Active Member
Bumping this old ass thread, but there is some important new data (not really, no one uses FX anymore :p). Anyways, I overclocked the HT to a x13 multiplier (for some reason, overclocking it seemed to solve some of the instability), and downclocked the RAM to a x8 multiplier (so that they would stay within AMD specs at 1600MHz -1760 with the FSB OC-), and that actually let me go up to 220MHz on the FSB. Haven't tried more yet, but I've been stress testing for a bit and no problem. Not even throttle. Scores actually look pretty good.

7falTxZ.png
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top