I got to 2.5!!!

Ctcoyote16

Ctcoyote16

New Member
I want to just let everyone know that i've reached 2.5ghz with ease wiht the help of my new heatsink, the 9500LED. I wanna thank all you guys for helping me out when I needed it, otherwise none of this would've happened.
cpuz2bbb6um.png

I've yet to run 06 on the 2.5, I ran it running 2.4 and i got 4292, so i cant wait to see what i will get.
 
Ouch!

Ctcoyote16 said:
I want to just let everyone know that i've reached 2.5..
Click to expand...

Dude maybe you have reached 2.5Ghz, but your HTT is at 1.14Ghz (228 x 5 = 1140!!) That's not good and you should never really go over 1000Mhz for stability issues. In the BIOS, change your HTT multiplier to 4X. You should have read some more before venturing into the OC land (we all make mistakes ;)) Otherwise, congrats.

YOU COULD FACE SOME ISSUES SOON, so change it.

JAN :D
 
Last edited:
jancz3rt said:
Dude maybe you have reached 2.5Ghz, but your HTT is at 1.14Ghz (228 x 5 = 1140!!) That's not good and you should never really go over 1000Mhz for stability issues. In the BIOS, change your HTT multiplier to 4X. You should have read some more before venturing into the OC land (we all make mistakes ;)) Otherwise, congrats.

YOU COULD FACE SOME ISSUES SOON, so change it.

JAN :D
Click to expand...

thanks
 
i changed the LDT/FSB Frequency Ratio (i think its the same) to 4x instead of auto, now that HT thing is at 900

is this ok?
 
yeah....

Yup, as long as you are below or at 1000Mhz, all is good. In fact, tests have shown that lower HTT like 900Mhz has no impact on performance.

JAN :D
 
jancz3rt said:
Yup, as long as you are below or at 1000Mhz, all is good. In fact, tests have shown that lower HTT like 900Mhz has no impact on performance.

JAN :D
Click to expand...

well i ran 3dmark 06 and my score dropped from 4292 to like 4150 but oh well
 
yea my ram cant take higher clocks than its already at... my proc could probly get higher(no Vcore increase), but i tried lowering timings... eh who cares im getting 2gb ddr500 very o/cable (default at 2.7V manufacturer allows 2.9V!) ram.
lol 1gb wont take ultra quality in quake 4... oh well whateverrr..
 
(default at 2.7V manufacturer allows 2.9V!) ram.
Click to expand...
Well 2.9v is just .1v up from max reference whereas 2.7 is .2v up from reference so your spectrum is actually .1v smaller
 
jancz3rt said:
Dude maybe you have reached 2.5Ghz, but your HTT is at 1.14Ghz (228 x 5 = 1140!!) That's not good and you should never really go over 1000Mhz for stability issues. In the BIOS, change your HTT multiplier to 4X. You should have read some more before venturing into the OC land (we all make mistakes ;)) Otherwise, congrats.

YOU COULD FACE SOME ISSUES SOON, so change it.

JAN :D
Click to expand...
??:confused: ...i read somewhere that for 939's the HTT should be around 2000 and for 754 is should be in between 1200-1800..

oh here
http://www.dfi-street.com/forum/showthread.php?t=20823
On socket 754 cpu's the stock HTT speed is 1600 .. Its best to keep this between 1200-1800 when overclocking to maintain stability.. On socket 939 cpu's the stock HTT is 2000.. And its best to keep this at or around 2000 when overclocking.. The HTT bus is in no way saturated, so even underclocking this a little to maintain stability is fine ...
Click to expand...
 
Jan's defined HTT as 228 x 5 = 1140 (HT * HTT multi). On this guide, they'd have defined it as 228 x 2 x 5 (RAM speed * HTT multi). Jan's statement that it's too high is correct. If you're using the figures from that site, his HTT is at 2280 - too high.
 
Last edited:
ceewi1 said:
Jan's defined HTT as 228 x 5 = 1140 (HT * HTT multi). On this guide, they'd have defined it as 228 x 2 x 5 (RAM speed * HTT multi). Jan's statement that it's too high is correct. If you're using the figures from that site, his HTT is at 2280 - too high.
Click to expand...
oic thanks for clearing that up
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top