-
Welcome to Overclockers Forums! Join us to reply in threads, receive reduced ads, and to customize your site experience!
Is this even possable for SDR
- Thread starter Mr. $T$
- Start date
- Joined
- Jun 27, 2002
- Location
- NL, Europe
CAS2 as in 2-2-2, 5/7t or as in 2-3-3, 7/9t? :>
- Joined
- Apr 6, 2002
Mr. $T$ said:I have this stick of SDR on my pIII Machine that can do 166 FSB at CAS 2 and at 3.3vis this quite possably the fastest stick of SDR ever made.
BTW: it scored 1263 in SiSoft not bad for a gig pIII
I just had to shair that with all of you
What brand/size/chips/where was it purchased?
- Joined
- Jun 27, 2002
- Location
- NL, Europe
paulie said:
Hm I do. I myself had 'older' Rev2 Mushkin (256Mb) and it did 160 @ 2-2-2, 5/7t.
- Joined
- Apr 3, 2002
- Location
- Bloomington, IN
What kind of RAM testing did you did at those timings? Just curious -- Paulpaulie said:
- Joined
- Jun 15, 2002
I used memtest86. The funny thing is, it's rock stable at up to 160mhz 2-2-2 5/7 inside windows. memtest86 always gets errors @ 157mhz, but it's a more thorough test so I will say 156mhz is the true 100% stable speed.macklin01 said:
I have tested a dozen or so Kingmax PC150 sticks and I have found that the 256mb sticks tend to oc a lot better than the 512mb ones.
- Joined
- Apr 3, 2002
- Location
- Bloomington, IN
Interesting!
I also use memtest86, but I could only make it through 149 MHz at 2-2-2-5/7 on both my 256 MB sticks. (both from mwave.) I can't quite remember if the errors I found were in the default tests or in the extended tests, though. I guess that's just the luck of the draw ...
Nice OC! -- Paul
I also use memtest86, but I could only make it through 149 MHz at 2-2-2-5/7 on both my 256 MB sticks. (both from mwave.) I can't quite remember if the errors I found were in the default tests or in the extended tests, though. I guess that's just the luck of the draw ...
Nice OC!
-- Paul
- Joined
- Apr 3, 2002
- Location
- Bloomington, IN
That's pretty impressive! Some people hit big with "luck of the draw" ... Very nice! Make sure it's really stable, though, i.e., run a battery of stability tests, not just (for example) boot windows and play a game or two. -- Paul
Very nice! Make sure it's really stable, though, i.e., run a battery of stability tests, not just (for example) boot windows and play a game or two. -- Paul
- Joined
- Apr 3, 2002
- Location
- Bloomington, IN
Cool! I remember when I used to fold with this machine ...
That doesn't rule out all possible RAM-related data corruption, but it's a very good sign. The thing about a RAM overclock is that some operations may be stable while others may not be at certain addresses at a giving speed / timing setting. It is entirely possible to have an unstable RAM overclock but only rarely encounter those bad operations. (like only some applications may generate the bad operations in the bad addresses and crash, while most others are fine) Without a thorough RAM check (that goes over many of these read / write / move operations), it's hard to say that the above wouldn't happen. For day-to-day computing, I would suppose that would count as stable. (I guess I'm just nitpicky, but I can't afford to have a calculation die in hour 26 due to such an error.)
I've always found it interesting how the definition of a stable RAM overclock can vary. At the end of the day, it only has to be as stable as your needs and expectations.
Way to go on a terrific overclock. That's simply fantastic!
-- Paul
I remember when I used to fold with this machine ... That doesn't rule out all possible RAM-related data corruption, but it's a very good sign. The thing about a RAM overclock is that some operations may be stable while others may not be at certain addresses at a giving speed / timing setting. It is entirely possible to have an unstable RAM overclock but only rarely encounter those bad operations. (like only some applications may generate the bad operations in the bad addresses and crash, while most others are fine) Without a thorough RAM check (that goes over many of these read / write / move operations), it's hard to say that the above wouldn't happen. For day-to-day computing, I would suppose that would count as stable. (I guess I'm just nitpicky, but I can't afford to have a calculation die in hour 26 due to such an error.)
I've always found it interesting how the definition of a stable RAM overclock can vary. At the end of the day, it only has to be as stable as your needs and expectations.
Way to go on a terrific overclock. That's simply fantastic!
-- Paul
Similar threads
