• Some users have recently had their accounts hijacked. It seems that the now defunct EVGA forums might have compromised your password there and seems many are using the same PW here. We would suggest you UPDATE YOUR PASSWORD and TURN ON 2FA for your account here to further secure it. None of the compromised accounts had 2FA turned on.
    Once you have enabled 2FA, your account will be updated soon to show a badge, letting other members know that you use 2FA to protect your account. This should be beneficial for everyone that uses FSFT.

do sata hdds still effect fsb overclocking?

R

ryuji

2[H]4U
Joined
Jun 11, 2004
Messages
3,115
my friends bent on the fact that sata hdds=less oc, but i think this is not true anymore ever since athlon-xp mobo's died out
i have found plenty of ppl on intel and amd side who have high fsb, is this a issue nowdays, he insists that all extreme overclockers use pata hdds, but from my experience there a bit less reliable due to the fact that you need cable lengths that are less then 16 inches or you get signal loss
 
For me they don't. No matter which post my drive is plugged into, stable at FSB 300.
 
i do remember some hype about overclocking and sata, but i think sata 2 drives fixed that.....and newer chipsets.......

soulsaver
 
Ever since I upgraded to my 3.2E, Raptor, Zalman heatsinks, and powersupply this past summer I haven't been able to overclock any more than to 3.23 with it still recognizing my harddrive. I have tried both of the SATA ports on my motherboard too.
 
Killroy said:
Ever since I upgraded to my 3.2E, Raptor, Zalman heatsinks, and powersupply this past summer I haven't been able to overclock any more than to 3.23 with it still recognizing my harddrive. I have tried both of the SATA ports on my motherboard too.
Click to expand...

I experienced a similar problem with a 2.4 Celeron D. I was never able to break 3.4 ghz on a SATA boot drive but I got 3.7 ghz on a normal drive.
 
Killroy said:
Ever since I upgraded to my 3.2E, Raptor, Zalman heatsinks, and powersupply this past summer I haven't been able to overclock any more than to 3.23 with it still recognizing my harddrive. I have tried both of the SATA ports on my motherboard too.
Click to expand...


lol, i had my 3.2e up to 4ghz semi-stable. And at 3.8 it was awesomely stable.
 
I have a dfi lan party nf4 ut ultra-d mb, using sata ports 1 and 2 I cannot go over 230, go to 231 and the system is not stable. I was told ports 3 and 4 will not have any issues, I have not tried yet, at 230 fsb no divider atm still on ports 1 and 2.
 
Killroy said:
Ever since I upgraded to my 3.2E, Raptor, Zalman heatsinks, and powersupply this past summer I haven't been able to overclock any more than to 3.23 with it still recognizing my harddrive. I have tried both of the SATA ports on my motherboard too.
Click to expand...
sounds like a non existant pci lock to me
 
Kritter said:
lol, i had my 3.2e up to 4ghz semi-stable. And at 3.8 it was awesomely stable.
Click to expand...
my 3.2e did 250 1:1 rock solid stable, needed quite a bit of voltage tho, ended up being too much for my mobo/psu....
 
Doesn't matter. I've heard people say don't use the Silicon Image SATA controller, but idk about that. I use the nForce one anyway. :)
 
i heard that they can if you use unlocked sata ports on ur mobo....so juss stick with the locked ones ;)
 
ryuji said:
i didnt once say led in my post, where did that come from
Click to expand...

lol I was looking up LED pin diagrams for a RAID card at work at the same time I was typing that. LEDs is definitely a typo.
 
ryuji said:
no divider?
Click to expand...
RAM on a divider, processor @ 7X. This was just to test max FSB in P95. Just to confirm that my board had a lock, I ran 8 hours of P95 at 300 FSB for each of the 4 nForce 4 ultra SATA plugs. All completely stable. No disk corruption.
 
itll only limit it if the sata ports are unlocked, like hte onboard sata on hte NF3 boards. if theyre locked, there is no difference
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top