overclocking with TUSL2-C - user opinions:

please, id like to know what bios revision you have, is it the tweaker x-86 version?
also, what about i815 windows tweaker, have you ever tried it?
thanks.

Hi, I am using version 12 beta 7 from Asus and finally managed to get the 1.0A as the 1.1a was gone but I am happy cause as most said it runs @133Mhz straight from the box at default 1.45V although Sandra says it is 1.5V.have to add that the heat sink is from coolermaster model DP5-7H53F.
temps are Mainboard 34C cpu 45C on load using Sandra Burn in wizard bit on the high side but still OK( now I wish I got the 1.1A as I am pretty sure it would have gone to 133Mhz with no probs).

evimarn said:

Hi, I am using version 12 beta 7 from Asus...

Click to expand...

evimarn, im not sure if you know, if not you may want to, the bios from asus to the tusl2-c will disable a few settings when youre overclocking your system. check this out.

h2k!!, if you see this can you tell me if youve tried out the i815 windows tweaker yet? what you think?
BUMP!!

I've tried the 815 tweaker for xp only. It works pretty well, and I would suggest it to anyone who doesn't wanna run a hacked bios. There's just some settings that can't be changed with it from within windows, like CAS latency.

Performance wise, I find them to be about the same.

you mean there is a performance difference between the asus and the tweaker versions?
i just updated mine but since i have so many things now to worry about with new cpu and video card, both overclocking and im still worrying about my cooling. i not even had the time to test perfroamnce of both bioses. so did you get any?
if so do u think its due to the settings the bios keeps enabled?
thanks h2k.

There is a definite performance difference between the asus original bios and the x86-secret hacked bios. The hacked one is faster. The windows based tweaker will give close to the same performance as the hacked bios.

Basically, the hacked bios turns on settings that are normally disabled at higher fsb speeds.

but did you test performance at stock speed/divisors?

Hi Otto right now i am still burnin in the puppy using 133 fsb @1.55v according to bios and sisoft after about 24hrs already seems more stable during burnin and some intensive tasks such as rendering and scanning,lets hope for the best.
evimarn

evimarn said:

Hi Otto right now i am still burnin in the puppy using 133 fsb @1.55v according to bios and sisoft after about 24hrs already seems more stable during burnin and some intensive tasks such as rendering and scanning,lets hope for the best.
evimarn

Click to expand...

evimarn that youre doing is overclock not burn-in of the processor. i sent you the link to the burn-in process. when you burn-in a cpu you want it running at the lowest possible fsb and highest voltage plus low temperature. the burn-in wont work with high temperatures nor low voltages and high fsb. that link explains everything pretty well. a good way to you would be something like 66MHz and the highest voltage the bios has available - i think 1.675V, right?. and try keeping temperature the lowest you can.

Ye your're right Otto I read that link aswell and I sort of tried this way as I read somewhere that it didn't matter much the frequency as long as the temp was low and since it didn't really change much I sort of did it with no thinking about and it seems that its working, about its life I don't think that it will matter much if it lasts a year or more 'cause I am pretty sure it will be a junk by comparison to the next generation cpus,but honestly I really appreciate your concern and if its not too late, seeing that it seems quite normally runnin' that as soon as I decide for higher bus speeds I'll go back to the norm of burn-in.
What do you think?
and yes I should have used the term trial run not burn-in as in Burn-in.
Thanks
evimarn