View Full Version : 220x11 or 210x12?
sHape oF gReY
07-28-03, 07:10 PM
Just like the title says.... what ya'll think?
cherryp00t
07-28-03, 08:13 PM
id say 210x12 because 2.5 ghz looks much cooler then 2.4 ghz ;d
Cúchulainn
07-28-03, 08:41 PM
All other settings being equal those are about the same. Personally I would rather have a little extra memory bandwidth. Might be ready for 221fsb+ in a few weeks after you've been running at 220, you never know ;)
treepop
07-28-03, 09:00 PM
Cúchulainn
are you saying that if I ran mine unstable at say 205x 10 for a week or so then it woud eventually get more stable at higher bandwiths?
WhiteHawk
07-28-03, 09:10 PM
yes and no, it depends. sometimes hardware works better(faster) after "burning in".
Also, knowing that you can even push it to xmhz at a stable fsb lets you know that you can push it higher. IMO the "burning in" is just a myth, i've never benefitted from burning in at high settings/voltages.... maybe i'm just unlucky ;)
sHape oF gReY
07-28-03, 10:40 PM
gona try the so called "burn in" for the next few days...probly 3 or 4 at 220x11 at 1.9Vcore then try the FSB_Sense mod :D , really wana hit 230 FSB... or be able to get more bandwith out of the ram :p
Caffinehog
07-29-03, 12:03 AM
Does that 10mhz make a difference in your memory timings?
Originally posted by sHape oF gReY
gona try the so called "burn in" for the next few days...probly 3 or 4 at 220x11 at 1.9Vcore then try the FSB_Sense mod :D , really wana hit 230 FSB... or be able to get more bandwith out of the ram :p
Generally with a burn in, you will want to lower the frequency to stock, and then up the vcore to something like 1.9v and run prime 95 for like 48hrs.
Originally posted by Chowdy
Also, knowing that you can even push it to xmhz at a stable fsb lets you know that you can push it higher. IMO the "burning in" is just a myth, i've never benefitted from burning in at high settings/voltages.... maybe i'm just unlucky ;)
Seeing that a lot of people have benefitted from a burn-in leads me to belive it is not a myth. My 1700 hit a wall at 2400Mhz when I first got it. I did a burn-in and got it to 2530Mhz stable. I tend to atribute that to the burn in I did since it was the only thing I did to the system between those two overclocks.
Caffinehog
07-29-03, 02:20 AM
I believe in burning in... I just do the slow burn. I set it to the max I can get, and maybe add about a slight voltage bump. After a few weeks, I can go further, generally an extra 25-75mhz. After that time, I get stable overclocks at settings that were unstable before.
vBulletin® v3.8.7, Copyright ©2000-2012, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.