Overclocking my System (new member)

Hi, i am new to this forum, so please excuse my lack of knowledge. I haven't had time to read ALL the other posts.

I recently got a new job, so the first thing I did was completely update my system.

I now own:

Asus A7N8X deluxe
AMD XP 2200+
2 x 256mb DDR 333 Samsung
120gb Seagate SATA
Radeon 9700pro
All latest drivers installed (mb, gfx, etc)
Windows XP pro SP1

The system is great, but I am keen to see how far I can push it. I haven't had much experience with overclocking before. (I know what a jumper is, and how the bios works, but that is about it). I was wondering if anyone had any suggestions as to what can/could be done with this system, where to start, or if anyone has had any expe rience with this combination or similar of components. I can provide any other required information if needed, eg driver versions, voltages?, temps

Also, seeing as this is the first time I have owned an AMD, I was wondering why it says 2200+, but in systems properties etc it comes up as 1800.

Welcome to the forums!

You have a very solid system there. It should quite a bit of fun for ya.

I would do a search on these forums to check and see what other people or getting out of the XP2200. That would be the fastest way to find out.

For your question. the 2200 is AMD's naming convention. When you bought the cpu, you bought an AMD XP 2200+. Under the system properties if you look closer, it'll say 1800 Ghz, which would be the actual rated speed for the 2200+ processor.

hey thanks for the reply.

In my bios I have an option to set some settings to "aggressive", it looks like it might be an easy way to get some more performance out of my box. Is this a good thing to do?, or should I be looking more into the manual settings of the multipliers and the other things in there?

I am also now running folding@home. I was running seti, but my mum had leukemia, so folding seems like a more worthwhile option.

You have a very good looking machine there, but I am afraid that the 2200 is not much of an overclocker. It was the last chip that AMD made on the t'bred A process, and therefore is about maxed out. Most people get them to overclock 100-200Mhz with high end cooling, but that is about it. It is a good chip to start on, but you aren't going to get really high speeds out of it.

I would suggest playing with it some, and learning all you can on these forums, then if you feel comfortable, invest in a t'bred B chip or a Barton. They are the best overclockers currently, but it would be useful to have a practice chip. Good luck, and welcome to the forums!

Thanks altec,

I was just reading some of the stuff about the thoroughbread A and B thing. I am still going to play around but I might wait a bit and get something like the Barton that I can really max out

I just want to note that I'm sorry to hear about your mom's leukemia. I had an aunt that died from it.

Folding is talked a lot on these forums, mostly for bragging rights, but it's nice to know that there are some of us who truly see the point behind Folding.

Thanks for the reminder.

Abra_Volta said:

I just want to note that I'm sorry to hear about your mom's leukemia. I had an aunt that died from it.

Folding is talked a lot on these forums, mostly for bragging rights, but it's nice to know that there are some of us who truly see the point behind Folding.

Thanks for the reminder.

Click to expand...

hes right folding is alot of bragging here. i just fold to fold and help out that reasearch. its kinda funny if there is a thread that says"Im in the top 5,000" i bump it, then make my own thread saying "Im in the top 255,000" and they are right next to each other. it kinda funny.

so anyways,WELCOME TO THE FORUMS!!!!!

the 2200 is not a real great overclocker, but its better than a 2100 pali. just about everything in that system is awsome!!!!
AMD uses performace ratings. so a 1.73 is a 2100, 1.8 a 2200 , 2.0 is a 2400, 2.067 is supposed to be 2600 (but it isnt really) 2.17 is a 2700,and 2.25 is a 2800

for the barton cored cpu's

1.83 is a 2500, 2.0 is a 2800, 2.15 is a 3000 and 2.2 is a 3200

thanks for the replys, and the concern. I think that the bragging is probably ok, it is for a good cause, and team 32 is doing a lot to help. As long as you keep in mind what you are doing it for.

Anyway, so are you saying that the new 3200+ runs at ~ 2200mhz? That seems unusual that it would compare with a P4 running at ~ 3000mhz. Is it just that the processors process in different ways, and the AMD's don't need to run that fast to do the same job?

Is the name on the AMD's eg 2200+ a system of comparing them to their P4 counterparts?

Exactly AMDs do more work per clock cycle then a P4 so the performance of an xp2200 is about the same as a P4 2.2Ghz even though the AMD is only running at 1.8Ghz. The P4 2.2 will win at certain things and the xp2200 will win at certain things due to their different architectures but on the whole they perform very similarly.

The xp3200 is a barton and it has more L2 cache then the older Tbred/palaminos. My xp1800 and your xp2200 have 256K of L2 cache and the barton has 512K, the same as a P4. Cache is like RAM built right into the CPU but it runs way faster then normal RAM. The maore cache a CPU has the less it will have to use the much slower system RAM and ,therefore, the better it performs. Because our chips have less L2 cache we would not perform at 3GHz P4 levels even if we got our clock speed to 2.2Ghz.

I personally feel that the rating of xp3200 is a little high for that CPU, if the CPU was 66mhz-100mhz faster or if it was rated xp3000 then I would probably fully agree with the rating, it is still a good chip though.