• Welcome to Overclockers Forums! Join us to reply in threads, receive reduced ads, and to customize your site experience!

Weird poll: What's the LOWEST overclock you have gotten on your SL6Z3 (2.4c m0)

Overclockers is supported by our readers. When you click a link to make a purchase, we may earn a commission. Learn More.

Flakk

Member
Joined
Nov 10, 2003
Location
Oregon, USA
if you have a sl6z3 and are running it faster than mine (3.24ghz) 100% prime stable, just post "mine whooped yours", or something to that extent. I want to get an idea of how many people beat me here. If nobody gets lower than me then maybe it's a sign that something else on my system is causing the problems.

My story:
Yes, it is sad but true, I can only attain a stable 3.24ghz (270fsb) with 1.5625 volts on my "m0" stepping cpu. See specs below for full computer info. Even with 1.65 volts and the most relaxed memory settings possible it isn't Prime stable even 5mhz fsb more (at 275fsb)... weird eh?

Is there anyone else who has a "low" result like mine, or am I the record setter for worst overclock on a m0? lol. I want to know just how bad my luck is.

If you do somehow happen to have a worse overclock, explain what you think is holding it back. (if it is the CPU or just something else on your system like memory or power supply)

In my case I finally believe it is my CPU's limit... i really never could believe that but after buying new ram and cooling my northbridge and CPU better, I cannot think of anything else that could be holding it back. No matter what I do I can't make it Prime stable above 270FSB, and thus my sh***y CPU :D

I didn't plan on getting a Prescott. Figured I could get a super overclock on my m0. It doesnt impress me as much as i wanted... Thus the upgrade to Prescott now lingers in my future :O
 
Last edited:

(v)estra

Member
Joined
Jun 14, 2003
Location
Louisiana
mine whooped urs... hrm but ur ram might be holding u back the most u can get outa it might be 281 :( at 3/2 divider i know i can run mine up to spec but not over spec with a divider... did u try new ram (this might be the problem :p)
 
OP
Flakk

Flakk

Member
Joined
Nov 10, 2003
Location
Oregon, USA
i have tried 2 types of memory. Samsung PC3200 and this new Kingston HyperX. Both allow me exactly the same overclock on my cpu.

I am able to run both rams at well over spec with a little voltage. Each can easily go 217mhz using a 5:4 divider on 270 fsb.
 

Z_oc

Member
Joined
Mar 18, 2003
Flakk,

I've got a 2.4C M0 that is on par with your proc. In fact, I run it at 3.2 GHz (266 x 12). CPU maxes out around 3.25 GHz.

Might be the proc, might be the board. Don't thinks it's the RAM.

Tried with 3 different types of RAM; at first the Kingston with CH-5 chips was holding me back, I could go no higher than 260 MHz FSB. Now usng different memory brand and chips, and I'm confident it's not the RAM. Tried with mem at 3:2 and 5:4, lower mem or looser timings don't get me a higher OC.

Strangely the CPU behaves best at default Vcore; upping the voltages have not yielded real MHz gains - the proc is not stable at higher speeds.

On one hand I'm a litlle bit dissapointed by not being able to achieve 3.4 GHz - especially with M0. On the otherhand, 3.2 GHz without any increase in Vcore or temps is reassuring. After all it's an 800 MHz OC, though 1 GHz or 1.1 GHz would have been sweeter. :)

Read some threads about the design of the Asus boards power regulation and how the extra vcore doesn't help after 1.6 volts; but not yet into doing the mod on the board. Not changing the board yet, as there's a lot of new procs expected to hit the mkt. this year - would rather see how they perform.

With this much of "conservatism" 3.2 GHz is enough for me at the moment; however will be on the lookout for any "magic" chips that can take me 3.4 GHz or higher with my current setup.

At one time I was pretty optimistic about the Prescott, but with voltage and temperature alarm bells ringing, it looks a bit dicey. However a 2.8 GHz Prescott at 3.5 GHz would be sweet, given that prices are below the $200 mark, and the extra instructions and cache give it a performance edge over Northwood P4 processors (and defintely not melt the mobo, pun intended).
 
OP
Flakk

Flakk

Member
Joined
Nov 10, 2003
Location
Oregon, USA
ah, finally someone in my shoes. Like yourself I have it narrowed down to the CPU or motherboard. It's like a solid wall on mine.. it will work at 3.24ghz and just a few mhz higher it will not work no matter what voltage i use. seems very odd to me. The thought of selling my 2.4 m0 on ebay and buying a new 2.8 m0 has crossed my mind as of late... but I figure I might as well just wait for the prescots and get one of those instead :)

God how many times i have wished there was some magical setting to get that last few hundred megahertz overclock from my m0... im sure you feel my pain as well. I also have been forced to take this conservative look at it.. "well 800mhz is still a good overclock and its better than what i had" :\


MORE!! :)
 

asw7576

Member
Joined
Jan 7, 2002
Location
Jakarta
This could make you happy..... it makes your processor like a PRO!!!

My SL6Z3 is only capable to 240 FSB 1: 1 with default voltage. I don't know why..... maybe 1:1 reasons. But once I tried 5:4 setting as Larva said..... and still craps out at 3 GHz.
 

Z_oc

Member
Joined
Mar 18, 2003
Flakk,

I googled the FPO# of my proc and on a Japanese site found the guys running a SL6Z3 of same FPO at 300 MHz FSB ala 3.6 GHz at 1.625 or 1.650 vcore on an Asus P4C800. Doesn't that make you feel a little jealous! :)

Maybe the mobo is responsible for my lower OC, but it can be very easily my CPU. Every CPU is different.

A lot of people have hit 3.4 GHz or higher, but you'll see most of them are using more extreme components like water cooling and PC4000 memory, and in some cases doing mods. Some SL6Z3 procs have done really well with stock components - lucky guys who have them!

Tested a 2.6C recently and that's got a D1 core. The motherboard I used was an Abit IS7. It also maxed around the 3.25-3.3 GHz mark.

If you go thru the posts, a recent batch of 1.8A is reported to OC effortlessly up to 3.0 GHz at default vcore - that is mighty impressive. Maybe with the current manufacturing process Intel is getting good yields up to 3.2 GHz, but beyond that there are not many procs around.

If I would switch to Prescott, my minimum goal would be 3.5-3.6 GHz - what do u say? 3.4 GHz would be acceptable only if the extra cache plus new instructions would give a performance boost. But a lot of uncertainty is there given the thermal and power specs...

Dunno anything concrete about Prescott performance, and there are a lot of doubts. We'll have to wait and see. Hope to come across reviews within a month.
 

Rio71

Member
Joined
Feb 2, 2002
Location
Karlsruhe, Germany
... mine whooped yours :p
sl6z3 ; fpo# 3326
doing 300fsb (and up) with 1,675v on air. 3:2 , bh-5. (3400 @ 1,525v)
all #'es in memtest clean, but my is7-e can't handle this in win.
explorer crashes and bsod's... but prime is stable. :nut:
possibly an pci-fix problem or board-layout can't hanle this high speed.
im looking for p4c800 (-e) :drool:

i think average speed of sl6z3 is 3400mhz.
the most problems are board or board/ram.
 
OP
Flakk

Flakk

Member
Joined
Nov 10, 2003
Location
Oregon, USA
I just wish I had another motherboard so I could try my processor in it and see how far it goes in that. I think I'm going to sell my m0 and use my 2.4B until prescotts come out. There wasnt a big enough performance increase for me in the jump from 2.4B (running @ 2.8) -> 2.4C (runnin @3.24).

Perhaps there IS an issue with my motherboard, not allowing me to go past 270 fsb-- a weak northbridge or something to that extent. Well even if that's the case, I think my solution will be to find a CPU with a higher multiplier, so that I dont have to increase my FSB to such astronomical amounts. A 2.8 m0 would suffice, but then again Prescott is just around the corner :)

As for the subject of Prescott, I would want a good 3.4+ghz after overclock on mine. I am not really worried about performance though. I know it will be better than the current designs because of that extra memory. If you think about it, it makes sense. The 3.2EE chip has 2mb and it performs nearly on par with AMD's 64 bit chip... quite impressive. Well, a Prescott has half that memory, but still twice that of current CPUs (with 512kb). This leads one to believe there will still be a significant boost in performance on these.

As for overclocking, nobody really knows how well a Prescott will perform. The rumors of high heat and the fact that they use more power leads one to believe they might not overclock as well. I think this speculation is just that-- speculation. I'll just wait and see when they actually come out. I have a feeling they will do just fine. Maybe in the initial batches they wont oveclock to anything godly, but then again it took the 2.4 many core stepping revisions to get where it is now, a beast of an overclocker chip.

So i'm going to hibernate in the overclocking world for a bit and await the arrival of these new chips. In a few months I expect I shall be sporting a new overclocked Prescott :)
 
Last edited:

asw7576

Member
Joined
Jan 7, 2002
Location
Jakarta
asw7576 said:
This could make you happy..... it makes your processor like a PRO!!!

My SL6Z3 is only capable to 240 FSB 1: 1 with default voltage. I don't know why..... maybe 1:1 reasons. But once I tried 5:4 setting as Larva said..... and still craps out at 3 GHz.


oops.... edit: it was the memory which limit my OC. After a VMEM mod, I could run as high as 275FSB 1:1 with the following condition:

1.575 VCORE
3.266 VMEM
CL3-4-4-8-8
1:1 memory ratio
HT, Turbo, MAM, PAT enable
Extra heatsinks on the two mosfet near AGP slot

I think my memory remains the limiting factor, but I won't gain as much after memory replacement. So I decided to let go this option and be happy with it ( mine it's SL6Z3 D1 ), so it's okay.