View Full Version : Revenge of the 1.1a...HAHAHA
Who said the 1.1a's wouldn't o/c? After a brief burn-in, I'm at 131FSB, and this baby ain't nowhere near finished...BTW, is it me, or are those numbers for the P4 and XP really that low? I'll be back with more later...
and here's what a 1.1a looks like at 1500MHz...
hey ol' man...I got one with an "A", but it ain't lacking none, my friend...temps are 31-33C at idle, 36-38 at full load. I have the side of my case off now, which is actually hurting me, I think, because it's so hot in my room. When I get my 2 blowhole fans (92mm) mounted tonight, I hope for cooler temps...BTW, this is air-cooled...:D Let me borrow your water rig, ol' man, I'll see if I can get more out of it!
No one said it couldn't overclock :) Just that people would go with the 1.0a over the 1.1 :)
Although your benchmarks looks quite impressive keep up the good work.
6502kid
02-01-02, 08:33 PM
I also think these chips rock.
Take that P4 !:p
Originally posted by 6502kid
I also think these chips rock.
Take that P4 !:p
p4? take that amd :p
*points and laughs at amd*
the lowly celeron is taking on amds flagship cpu :D
6502kid...see if you can drop your voltage down some. I burned in at 1.75, then dropped to 1.675 stable as a rock, dropped about 2C on temps because of it :)
Well, had mine up to 148FSB...wouldn't boot at 148, started losing stability at 144...I'm at 138 now, running 1523MHz. I think I'll stay here for awhile, the view overlooking the AMD Valley of Death is very nice this time of year...*squinting* damn, there are a few P4's there, too :D I LOVE MY CELLIE!!!!!
Suspected you could jump higher, glad you were able to fix the other issues to finally enjoy this :)
yeah, Pinky...after I PM'ed you, I rebooted and tried 125...and it booted right up. That's wierd. I couldn't hit 124...but I could boot at 123 and 125? Anyway, stranger things have happened to me. I'll give it a few days of some intense priming and then see if I can get up there a little more. All I can say right now is that these tuallies are amazing...I should have gotten the 1.2a :p
Originally posted by takiwa
yeah, Pinky...after I PM'ed you, I rebooted and tried 125...and it booted right up. That's wierd. I couldn't hit 124...but I could boot at 123 and 125? Anyway, stranger things have happened to me. I'll give it a few days of some intense priming and then see if I can get up there a little more. All I can say right now is that these tuallies are amazing...I should have gotten the 1.2a :p
Explanation: at 123mhz you were still using a 1/3 divider, hence your components were running at 41mhz, at 124mhz still a 1/3 divider but one of your components didn't like running at 41.3mhz, so it craps out on you... at 125 you are now using a 1/4 divider, hence you're "underclocking" your components now at 31mhz, but they tend to like underclocking 2mhz more than overclocking 8mhz ;)
Hope that explains it, that's also why I suggested you jump right up to something past 125mhz, so you'd be in a safer zone to keep your components close to specs...
Originally posted by Pinky
Explanation: at 123mhz you were still using a 1/3 divider, hence your components were running at 41mhz, at 124mhz still a 1/3 divider but one of your components didn't like running at 41.3mhz, so it craps out on you... at 125 you are now using a 1/4 divider, hence you're "underclocking" your components now at 31mhz, but they tend to like underclocking 2mhz more than overclocking 8mhz ;)
Hope that explains it, that's also why I suggested you jump right up to something past 125mhz, so you'd be in a safer zone to keep your components close to specs...
Ahh... And I thought Abit boards always started their 1/4 dividers at 124fsb.
Yodums
6502kid
02-02-02, 09:04 AM
I am going to let it run at the 137fsb, 1.75v for a while.
Then I will have to decide if I want to try lowering the
vcore, or crank the fsb up a bit more.:p
Currently this thing runs 30c idle, and the only thing
that will get the temp over 32c is Prime95. Max I hit
now is 35c. Think I got some room to go now.
These chips are amazing. Intel's "bargan" CPU
comparing with both AMD and Intels top of the line
stuff, and crushing anything else.
Are we having fun yet ?
:D
that would explain it Pinky...right now, my AGP is at 70, and my PCI at 35...4 over on both, but it's doing it nicely...thank you again for all your help, I really do appreciate the time you with me on this :D
yeah, 6502kid..."bargain" chip my a$$...I feel like I stole something for Intel, this chip is so sweet! I am honestly wonder how high this thing could go on a board like the Gigabyte, with the user-defined dividers? As long as I could keep the rest of my system in spec, I think this chip would do 150-160FSB with the right cooling and burn-in...but I'm very happy with it right now :D :D :D
rogue1979
02-02-02, 11:30 AM
The Celeron 1.0a is impressive, my wife has one at 1420MHz. Although I wouldn't put too much stock in Sandra CPU scores, it just uses mathematical calculations, and the reference cpu's are somewhat inaccurate. With both clocked at 1420MHz, the Tualeron and a Thunderbird are dead even according to Sandra (both 4000/2000) when I compared my two machines. But in Nortons and Winbench 99 the Celeron falls behind by a sizable margin. The achilles heal is the inability of the Celeron to be run at high fsb speeds because of the locked multiplier. Also any P3 chipset just doesn't take advantage of DDR memory. The Sandra memory scores for the Thunderbird on a 761 chipset are 795/965, while the Celeron on a 815EP chipset scores 485/512. Both platforms are equal in price, so my preference is the Socket A which will be upgradeble to the new Thoroughbred while the socket 370 is gonna be limited to what we have now. Although cooling a Tualeron is much easier than a 1.4GHz or higher t-bird.
Originally posted by Yodums
Ahh... And I thought Abit boards always started their 1/4 dividers at 124fsb.
Yodums
That could be the case, if it were then the components are dealing better with 8mhz over than 2.5mhz under...
I know I ran into problems at 120mhz and 124 mhz.
Sorry, Yodums is right, it would be 124mhz for a 1/4 divider...
Although cooling a Tualeron is much easier than a 1.4GHz or higher t-bird. Actually, that's the whole point of getting Tualeron for someone like me who is seeking for a silent PC. You could run Tualeron with a fanless heatsink. Less heat alone suffices for me to prefer Tualeron over T-bird or XP.
For a performance-oriented machine, I'd pick a P4NW, though. BTW, I'm not an Intel fan and, in fact, I have T-bird 800MHz in my current machine, which will soon house a Tualeron.
You could run Tualeron with a fanless heatsink.
I wouldn't try it...hehe
The fact is, without unlocking the multiplier on a T-Bird, those chips will both handle about the same rise in FSB (to be fair, you have to test on the same platform). The only benefit I see is the DDR, and it ain't much (maybe 15%)...plus, were talking about the lowest, littlest, cheapest, most insignificant chip that Intel makes...taking on everything else out there!
Everybody sing with me now...."I looove my cellie, I looove my cellie..."
PS...just hope and pray (if you're an AMD fan) that Intel never decides to produce a DDR platform for the cellie...:D
Advice, don't put this anywhere the amd forum. The pr rating (desktop application) will really get smoked by the xp1600 and they will surely let you know that. Good oc though. I am for anyone that is into the hobby.
In areas where raw computational power is required the Celeron @ 1.5 ghz is actually faster than the XP @ 1.5 ghz....
In areas where memory bandwidth is required the XP is 'slightly' ahead of the Celeron on a DDR platform....Although Quake III really likes the XP and the P4, but the P6 archatecture still peforms admirably at Quake III at low resolutions and is about even at high resolutions as the video card (yes, even the top of the line Geforce 3) becomes the bottleneck in that equation....
They both have their advantages and disadvantages and both chips excel in different areas in terms of outright peformance....
But the XP is definatly not what you could call faster 'overall' at all....And on an SDRAM platform would, potentialy, be slower than the Celeron Tualatin @ an equivilent clock speed in almost all areas....
And the Celeron has far lower maximum temperatures and is capable of utilizing the fantastic Intel chipsets....
Not meaning to start a flame war....Just highlighting some points as I have allready been in an argument with a one eyed AMD supporter over this. And while Sandra is a synthetic benchmark it does show where a particular systems strengths and weeknesses lie....
ie:
The Celeron @ a comparible clock speed benchmarks faster than an XP in the CPU benchmark test - This is reflected in the fact that the Celeron Tualatin excels in raw computational power.
The XP @ a comparible FSB speed benchmarks faster than the Celeron in Sandra mem benchmark - This is reflected in the fact that the XP excels in areas where outright bandwidth is required.
In almost everything else the different chips' peformance qualities are pretty much even....
The above is also reflected in the tests peformed by the most AMD biased reviewer, Tom, at Tom's hardware when comparing the Celeron, Duron and XP chips in various reviews....
well, I'm sittin tight @ 140FSB after another burn-in...seems this chip is still nowhere near its limits...but cooling has become an issue. I am idling @ 35C...but under load it hits about 38-39C max, then backs down to 36C after about an hour under load...weird. I can't keep it any cooler than that with the fans I have, but I consider this a winner on air alone. Maybe I should look into water-cooling? I think, if the rest of my system could take it, this chip would run up pretty high. Anyway, some benches at 1545 for y'all...I promise I won't post any more ;)
And, it looks like the XP is getting beat...maybe it's just my eyes :p
and the multimedia bench is off the chain...:D
rogue1979
02-03-02, 05:02 AM
Well, I am not gonna speculate on raw cpu computational power. But from where I am sitting the AMD cpu is definately faster. I have a Celeron 1.0a at 10 x 142, and a Thunderbird (not XP) clocked down to 1420MHz 167 x 8.5 in the same room. My wife was running a P3 700@933MHz before she changed to a KT133 chipset and a Duron 650@1020MHz, then a T-bird 750@1016MHz. After about 6 mos with the socket A, she decided to switch back to Intel, first a Celeron 800@1100MHz and now the Tualeron, both on an 815EP chipset. In the mean time I upgraded from KT133 to AMD 761. All I can say is that I have another system I put together from my old 761 chipset motherboard and AXIA 1GHz@1400MHz, and she now wants to sell the Celeron and keep the AXIA. I asked her why and her first response was speed, then secondly stability. Sandra be darned, Winbench 99 shows the Thunderbird to be clearly faster. My wife's somewhat uninformed opinion supports this. I know that the main advantage of the Thunderbird is the fsb and DDR memory bandwidth, but that is part of what makes a system fast.
Plain and simple, as powerful and good as the Tualeron is, it does not have as good of a platform to work with as the Thunderbird has. Both systems are about equal in price, while the Celeron does run much cooler the T-bird platform can support much faster clocked cpu's like the XP 2000 or the upcoming Thoroughbred.
murdoch
02-03-02, 08:38 AM
Some nice o/cs there glad to see it. I find sandra is a little to forgiving for determining stability though. Its a great choice to start out with for an easy burn in for the chip. How does it hold up with prime and more so 3d mark2001. I find 3d mark2001 the best for determining stability cause it really tackles the vid card and ram along with the cpu when you start upping voltage and fsb. that way you will know why your system craps out in games or intense apps. start up 3dmark2001 and let it run over night if its there in the morning at those settings your fine but don't settle for what sandra tells you.
I had Prime95 running last night, with Sandra doing arithmatic, multimedia, and mem benches in the background...temp was 36C this morning when I woke up, after about 9 hours...I get around 750 on 3DMark 2001 (it won't run 7 of the tests, because of my drivers)...yeah, I know...I have one of the crappiest vid cards around, but it was $20.00 used, so...I can loop it for several hours (I've had it on about 4 hours tops), but I don't know what it would do overnight. I have have been compiling .ace files (mostly for games and .vob files from DVD's) since I o/c'ed it, and I have not had CRC's on compression or decompression. I consider this a very good test of an o/c, because of the computation required to ACE a file. I have had chips that passed the Sandra benches, that would give me ACE errors. All in all, I am calling this a success...until I get better cooling, then I'll try to squeeze a bit more out of it.
Good oc. I feel your pain on the video as I too am presently stuck with a pci mx2. Boot times are outrageous. Burned up the ram on my gf2 pro. Thats the name of the game.
Very good o\c takiwa,i'm happy for you.
So it seems that the low-end Tually is beating the Athlon's
Take care
Tasos
Originally posted by murdoch
Some nice o/cs there glad to see it. I find sandra is a little to forgiving for determining stability though. Its a great choice to start out with for an easy burn in for the chip. How does it hold up with prime and more so 3d mark2001. I find 3d mark2001 the best for determining stability cause it really tackles the vid card and ram along with the cpu when you start upping voltage and fsb. that way you will know why your system craps out in games or intense apps. start up 3dmark2001 and let it run over night if its there in the morning at those settings your fine but don't settle for what sandra tells you.
Ain't that a fact. I have run all kinds of cpu tests and the cpu will pass no problem, but one or two loops through 3dmk2001 and lock up. I now set 3dmark2001 for 5 loops. If it passes this I then do the cpu test. I have never had the processor fail testing after making it through the 3d test but have had it fail after passing prime 95, sisoft and cpu stab.
Very good o\c takiwa,i'm happy for you.
You should be happy for all of us...I learned how to do this (better than I did before) from coming here, and asking questions. This is a community O/C, from day one. I learned what chip I should buy, what mobo, how big my PSU should be, etc...I have been planning this system since my first post here. So, congratulations to everyone, for this nice o/c....thanks all!
:D :D :D
vBulletin® v3.8.7, Copyright ©2000-2012, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.