Page 3 of 4 FirstFirst ... 2 3 4 LastLast
Results 41 to 60 of 61
  1. #41
    Member lclark2074's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2002
    Location
    Coventry Rhode Island
    Posts
    997
    There is no problem running at 133 instead of 166 but remember that you are 600mhz slower than before you started! This will help you save processor life but thy last so long this is a mute issue
    abit bx6r2 abit AI7
    512 sd ram pc150 ddr1GB pc4200

    celoron 600 oc 900 intel p4 2.8E
    geforce fx 5200 AGP
    Creative Labs Audigy2
    overclocker seti team member
    Avatar by Über~PhLuBB

  2. #42
    Member Kemon's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Posts
    208
    Very nice thread!! I was totally clueless as to what overclocking was, well aside from the fact it makes your computer faster, and now it makes total sense!! thanks alot!

  3. #43
    Member Swatman's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Posts
    156
    as soon as i get a good cooling system i will over clock w00t
    ||Current Computer||
    ||Case: Corsair Carbide Series 500R Black ||
    ||Processor: AMD FX-8350 Vishera 4.0GHz||
    ||Mobo: GIGABYTE GA-990FXA-UD5||
    ||Graphics Card: XFX HD-695X-CNDC Radeon HD 6950 2GB 256-bit GDDR5||
    ||Hard Drive: Seagate Barracuda 7200.10 600GB 7200 RPM 32MB Cache SATA ||
    ||Ram: CORSAIR Vengeance 16GB (2 x 8GB) 240-Pin DDR3 SDRAM DDR3 1866 ||
    HEAT

  4. #44
    Member asusradeon's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Location
    127.0.0.1
    Posts
    1,255
    awesome thanks m8

  5. #45
    Member T1Cybernetic's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2004
    Location
    West Yorkshire, Uk, Nr Earth
    Posts
    242
    Wow my brain hurts after reading through this lot great post though +1 wisdom, There is alot here i did not know.
    Empty your mind. Be formless, shapeless, like water.
    Now you put water into a cup, it becomes the cup.
    You put water into a bottle, it becomes the bottle.
    You put it into a teapot, it becomes the teapot.
    Now, water can flow, or it can crash! Be water, my friend. (Bruce Lee)

  6. #46
    Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Location
    Fort Wayne, IN
    Posts
    115
    Great post! I always thought the opposite was true

    Overvolting does not increase overclocking potential by giving our hardware "more juice" or "more fuel".
    E6600@3.6GHz w/ Coolit Freezone CPU cooler
    ASUS P5W DH Deluxe
    ATI x1950xtx
    (2) 80GB Raptors in RAID0
    OCZ ATI Crossfire 2GB DDR2 800
    OCZ Game Xstream 700w
    (2) Dell 20" LCDs 2007FP
    Max Overclock: 4GHz (445x9)

  7. #47
    Member Peepaw's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Location
    Warner Robins, Ga
    Posts
    1,069
    Very nice write up.

  8. #48
    Mobo Cooking Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Posts
    805
    Nice, thanks for writing it, Feliz.
    Q6600 @ 3.6 Ghz 1.45V TRUE
    2x2 GB @ 1066 Mhz GSkill 5-5-5-15 @ 1.9 V
    Radeon 6870
    Maximus Formula II

    Q6600 @ 3.2 Ghz 1.35V AC freezer pro 7
    4 GB Patriot 800 Mhz DDR2 5-5-5-16 1.92V
    ATI x1950 256MB
    D975xbx2
    My heatware

  9. #49
    New Member catgoesmoo's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Posts
    1
    wow. cheers felinusz, excellent overview.

  10. #50
    Disabled
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Location
    Queensland, Australia
    Posts
    681
    nice guide, thanx

  11. #51
    New Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Posts
    1
    Quote Originally Posted by felinusz View Post
    When we increase our voltage high value (overvolting), we force the signal/voltage to reach a higher voltage high, but in the same amount of time as before. We stretch out the ‘range of motion’ (the difference between VSS and VCORE), but we leave the transition time alone. The result is that it takes considerably less time for the signal to switch from VSS to a VCORE that is within transistor tolerance – this accommodates our faster switching frequency, and keeps our overclocked signal switching frequency strong (stable) and within transistor tolerance.
    Sorry for the thread necromancy, but isn't there something wrong with this explanation?

    The above passage is claiming that with a higher VCORE ("When we increase our voltage high value", voltage high has been definied as VCORE), the signal takes less time to switch from VSS to VCORE.

    From what I have gathered by reading through, VSS to VCORE has been analogized to be a distance, so if the distance is increased between VSS to VCORE how would a higher VCORE result in a lower time allowed for the runner to reach VCORE from VSS within tolerance since the time allowed for the transition to occur is said to remain the same ("we leave the transition time alone")?

    The only way I see this working out is if he meant that increasing VCORE allows the T (period for VSS to VCORE) to be lowered, forcefully increasing the speed of the runner (frequency of processor).

    Any clarification appreciated.
    Last edited by ocping; 06-18-09 at 01:26 AM.

  12. #52
    Registered pokeatthedevil's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Posts
    16
    Two quick question about this:
    Is there any way to increase the tolerance(e.g. 5% to 10%)?
    If so, what stability issues would that cause?
    This sentence is not true.

  13. #53
    New Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Posts
    6
    thanks! I'll definitely be using this method!

  14. #54
    Senior Overclocking Magus felinusz's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2003
    Location
    Taiwan
    Posts
    3,245
    Quote Originally Posted by ocping View Post
    Sorry for the thread necromancy, but isn't there something wrong with this explanation?

    The above passage is claiming that with a higher VCORE ("When we increase our voltage high value", voltage high has been definied as VCORE), the signal takes less time to switch from VSS to VCORE.
    Despite changes to the voltage high value, the time it takes the signal to switch from low to high does not change.

    From what I have gathered by reading through, VSS to VCORE has been analogized to be a distance, so if the distance is increased between VSS to VCORE how would a higher VCORE result in a lower time allowed for the runner to reach VCORE from VSS within tolerance since the time allowed for the transition to occur is said to remain the same ("we leave the transition time alone")?
    While the time that it takes for the signal to switch low to high remains the same, the signal is 'moving faster' than it was before the voltage high was increased.

    Using the distance analogy, the runner is moving faster, at a greater meters per second rate than he was at a stock voltage high (or a stock 100 meter track). Running 110 metres in 10 seconds represents a faster transit than running 100 metres in 10 seconds, although the transit time is identical in both cases.


    The only way I see this working out is if he meant that increasing VCORE allows the T (period for VSS to VCORE) to be lowered, forcefully increasing the speed of the runner (frequency of processor).

    Any clarification appreciated.

    The 'speed' of the signal is increased by raising our voltage high, and this allows the signal to potentially reach transistor tolerance faster than it did at a stock voltage high. Remember though, that transistor tolerance and VCORE/voltage high are not one and the same; while the signal will switch low to high in the same amount of time as before, with an increased voltage high it will reach transistor tolerance faster.

  15. #55
    Member rnldrc22's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Location
    Dallas
    Posts
    149
    really great guide, i'm more confident now on attempting the overclocking of my i7 thru overvolting, i'm going to be extra careful.
    Case: HAF 922 with 3 fans
    Mobo: P67A-GD65
    CPU: I7 2600k @ 4.7 ghz 1.38v
    CPU Cooler: Corsair H50 Cooler
    Harddisk: OCZ Vertex 2 90gb / WD 500gb / Seagate 1tb
    Video: SLI MSI Hawk GTX 460 918/2001 / MSI Cyclone GTX 460 OCd 908/2260
    Memory: 16 gb of g.skills DDR3-1600mhz 8-8-6-19 1.65v
    OS: Windows7 Pro x64
    PSU:1000W Sparkle Power Supply

  16. #56
    devilDogbert's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Location
    New Jersey
    Posts
    39
    Second thread necro, apologies.

    This thread uses figures determined to be optimal for 2005 hardware, has technology and manufacturing changed enough in the past 6 years to suggest an update?
    AMD Phenom II x4 955 BE (kinda OC'ed to 3.5GHz)
    XFX Radeon 6870 1GB 256-bit GDDR5
    CM Hyper 212+ Evo HS
    Asus M5A99X EVO Mobo
    8Gb Ripjaws 1600 8-8-8-24
    Antec High Current Gamer 520W PS
    Win 7 Ult OEM x64 SP1

  17. #57
    [Citation Needed] Member Theocnoob's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    Canada. Eh?
    Posts
    9,644
    No need. ITs so simplified now. Do not exceed safe volts or heat, you're good

  18. #58
    Member janas19's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Location
    Hotlanta
    Posts
    132
    AWESOMMMME. Thanks felinusz!

    Gigabyte GA-EP45-UD3L, ATi Radeon Sapphire 552MB, Antec Earthwatts EA-380D, Thermaltake Strike Mx case

    http://valid.canardpc.com/show_oc.php?id=486269

  19. #59
    Registered
    Join Date
    Dec 2012
    Posts
    50
    Impressive guide. Small question comes to mind I back in days of yore, I overclocked my Pentium 233 MHZ to 266 Mhz. In order to achieve that I ran vcore at a lower value than stock. I think it one increment lower on the motherboard. It was stable and produced less heat than when I was overclocked at stock vcore. What could account for that?

  20. #60
    Senior Member


    Bobnova's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    Humboldt
    Posts
    20,950
    Author Profile Benching Profile Folding Profile Heatware Profile Rosetta Profile
    Voltage makes a much larger difference in power draw (and hence temperatures) than clocks do.
    "Two things are infinite: the universe and human stupidity; and I'm not sure about the the universe." -- Einstein (maybe)

    Thinking about an Asus motherboard? Think again.

    How to check your PSU with a multimeter.

    17bXw5t51rEBXGavJFMJsC8g7HQgThUGc7

Page 3 of 4 FirstFirst ... 2 3 4 LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •