OVERCLOCK PHENOM II X4 965

[caddi daddi]

he has it set with a 2600mgz cpu/nb and a 2000mgz htt.

kilyan, i think to might try running both of these at 2000 or so.

 

[kilyan]

he has it set with a 2600mgz cpu/nb and a 2000mgz htt.

kilyan, i think to might try running both of these at 2000 or so.

why? htt has no improvement in overclock while nb gives great improvement,if i'm not wrong

 

[keny]

CPU/NB doesn't improve the CPU overclock, it improves the speed at which the CPU can run you're memory, resulting in a better overclock in general, not just in CPU clock speed, and ht link will not improve you're overclock on a Deneb chip, but I think what caddi is thinking is that if you knock the NB down you to stock you can then reduce the voltage to the CPU/NB in turn buying you a few degrees of breathing space on the core

 

[caddi daddi]

Kilyan, Keny has hit it in the head, we would like to see your peak core temps closer to 55c.
when i am running for max clocks keeping these down also allows me to reduce cpu/nb voltage and gives me a degree or two on the core temps.
it costs nothing to try it and if it fails to help you takes only a second or two to reverse it.

 

[RGone]

That is a/the problem with becoming fixated on one statement voiced about all over the internet. It is widely stated that increasing CPU/NB is a huge performance increaser. Mostly true up to a point if every other parameter is taken into account.

1. Raised CPU/NB can limit an overclock. Not everytime but enough times to make it necessary to check to be sure CPU/NB is not too high for a specific cpu clock speed.

2. Raised CPU/NB can hinder stability. Not everytime but enough times to make it necessary to verify stability for each increase in CPU/NB.

3. Lowering CPU/NB can can decrease heat generated and thus the temps of the cpu. There was a 'running' argument wondering why AMD did not increase the CPU/NB a long time ago. The consensus was that raising CPU/NB to 2600Mhz a few years ago would have caused an increase in TDP which AMD did not want to do for the average desktop. They want to be able to sell cpus to work in the cheap OEM setups and not require them to increase power supplies and cooling.

4. AMD has increased the stock CPU/NB on the FX-series to 2600Mhz and that sumbeech does in fact run hot. I have watched my Vcore requirement scale in a line and then hit a step upward to gain CPU Mhz. IF I keep the speed of CPU/NB in check and keep it below the 2600Mhz that AMD now sets FX processor to, then I can increase CPU speed with a lower Vcore and less heat.

So I never fixate on only one aspect of an overclock. IF I am pushing to get P95 Blend stable at some greatly elevated CPU Mhz, then I must keep in mind what else can effect the overall cpu speed. The whole thing is a balancing act. A little of this for a little of that.

PS: YMMV. Personal testing is the final determiner.

 

[trents]

CPU/NB doesn't improve the CPU overclock, it improves the speed at which the CPU can run you're memory, resulting in a better overclock in general, not just in CPU clock speed, and ht link will not improve you're overclock on a Deneb chip, but I think what caddi is thinking is that if you knock the NB down you to stock you can then reduce the voltage to the CPU/NB in turn buying you a few degrees of breathing space on the core

Some clarification is needed here. Increasing the speed of the CPUNB improves memory performance but does not result in a higher core speed overclock and may even have some limiting effect on the overclock. Lowering the CPUNB frequency and voltage may shave off a little on the temp and can therefor may allow you to push the core frequency overclock a little higher. I think what Keny meant was that overclocking the CPUNB improves the overall performance, not the "oveclock in general".

 

[caddi daddi]

My comment is focused on getting his core temps closer to 55c from the 59c he has posted, not raise his clock. i think he is interested in game performance and that comes from the gpu for the most part so he should never see core temps at 59c doing that.

 

[RGone]

My comment is focused on getting his core temps closer to 55c from the 59c he has posted, not raise his clock. i think he is interested in game performance and that comes from the gpu for the most part so he should never see core temps at 59c doing that.

Eyep, I knew that lowering temps was your main concern. There are a few rendering apps that can seem to push even harder than 'normal' prime blend. Probably not if you manually adjust P95.

Super video cards at big screen resolutions, don't show much increase from CPU/NB but lesser resolutions and mid-level video cards can show some increased FPS. It is my understanding that to see the most improvement where you 'can see' an improvement can require a little less ram speed so you can tighten the timings. So the balancing act just intensefies.

 

[keny]

Some clarification is needed here. Increasing the speed of the CPUNB improves memory performance but does not result in a higher core speed overclock and may even have some limiting effect on the overclock. Lowering the CPUNB frequency and voltage may shave off a little on the temp and can therefor may allow you to push the core frequency overclock a little higher. I think what Keny meant was that overclocking the CPUNB improves the overall performance, not the "oveclock in general".

A lot of people get fixated on clock speed and that alone, forgetting that there are other aspects to achieving a good overclock "in general" and not just a balls out hunt for max clocks on the CPU.

 

[kilyan]

i got 3.9 on 2700mhz nb clock and 2000 ht stable at 1.45 vcore and 1.26 nb vid