![[H]ard|Forum](/styles/hardforum/xenforo/logo_dark.png){kind=logo}
-
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.
GA-D525TUD Atom Overclocking?
- Thread starter Kaidotech
- Start date
- Status
Uhmmm there are 6 reviews.. That doesn't constitute quite a few..
The older GA-D510UD was overclockable in BIOS with these settings:
CPU frequency: 166MHz default, range 100-1200
CPU Vcore 1.156MHz default, range 0.818v-1.331v
DRAM voltage 1.800v default, up to 2.100v
I have it in my server and it has worked well so far. Only complaint is that the fan is noisy, and Smart Fan either doesn't work or doesn't turn it down enough. I tried but couldn't find a chipset heatsink in my stash that would work. The included heatsink bolts through so I thought I could use push pins, but the motherboard holes are too small for even the small chipset push pins, and the screws with the original heatsink are too short for anything aftermarket. I also tried running passive, but it got super hot really quick because the heatsink is really small (intended to be fan cooled). My next step is to use a 60mm to 40mm fan adapter, and use a larger fan and maybe a resistor to slow it down.
CPU frequency: 166MHz default, range 100-1200
CPU Vcore 1.156MHz default, range 0.818v-1.331v
DRAM voltage 1.800v default, up to 2.100v
I have it in my server and it has worked well so far. Only complaint is that the fan is noisy, and Smart Fan either doesn't work or doesn't turn it down enough. I tried but couldn't find a chipset heatsink in my stash that would work. The included heatsink bolts through so I thought I could use push pins, but the motherboard holes are too small for even the small chipset push pins, and the screws with the original heatsink are too short for anything aftermarket. I also tried running passive, but it got super hot really quick because the heatsink is really small (intended to be fan cooled). My next step is to use a 60mm to 40mm fan adapter, and use a larger fan and maybe a resistor to slow it down.
Yep it is going to take a small hit in image quality.
I Wouldnt trust there performance. If you want low power to use for TV viewing I would consider something with better onboard video like the Asus 880g mITX Board with a 45w Athlon II x2 or an i3 build. Either way the cost goes up compared to the atom by a bunch, but so does the performance, but both are still very easy on the power.
I had an ion board with a atom 330... There is no way it would push 1080p decently.
Well as I said in an above post, all I need is 2Ghz to run 1080p and Im not interested in ION, I want a single chip solution, and ordered the Gigabyte board today. I'm going to overclock the Atom D525 from 1.8ghz to 2.0ghz
believe me I wouldn't recommend the ion for anything at this point. I Think you probably made the right choice. The only thing I would be skeptical on is that 2ghz isnt the same as 2ghz or 2ghz depending on the technology. That being said if what you needed was a p4 at 2ghz then what your getting is alot faster at stock speeds. But if the 2ghz number was based on newer hardware then there may be an issue. But only time will tell I guess.
You should take your own advice and read my post. I did not say it was a Core 2 CPU. I said it was Core 2 based, which it is (maybe you should look things up while you're at it as it sounds like you need to do your homework). I think you're mistaken in believing that that Atom chip will outperform an E1300 merely on the basis of having more cache and hyperthreading (and you can't compare FSB because the Atom CPU doesn't have one). If you really think clock speed is everything, why don't you try playing back 1080p content on a 2ghz Pentium 4 (I'll save you the trouble and let you know that a 9+ year old CPU won't cut it).
It does push 1080p with very low cpu usage for BD/HD rips it's more than enough if you get the right drivers and use apps that support acceleration (XBMC, MPC-HC, even MCE with the correct ffdshow build)
The only thing ION can't do is audio bitstreaming. I have one as an extender and it's awesome. I can play Sintel (> 1080p) over samba with 0 dropped frames. Also tried the killa sample with similar success so I don't know what you talk about.
Flash is altogether a different issue but since acceleration efforts first began there were huge strides and it's actually doable now. At the beginning frames had to be copied over to be processed back and forth the memory and the IGP now it's no longer neccesary and works pretty well.
If you do hate ION... well you could go with a Celeron e3200 or similar. Maybe your mobo has a mini pci-e slot? There is always the broadcom Crystal HD.
I still use ION for media extenders for my buddies. Most can't tell the difference between LPCM and HD audio anyway and they are happy.
Just because I chose not to change my handle after using it for 10 years doesn't mean you should dismiss me as not knowing anything. If anything, I may know a hell of a lot more. You may do this for a living, but so do I (previously a network administrator for a sizable company and more recently the director of the VoIP division for an ISP). You're the one that started all this anyway.
- Joined
- Jun 27, 2001
- Messages
- 15,828
play nice children...
anyway, I have an ION/Atom board and it has difficulties playing back 1080p video... so take that for whatever its worth
anyway, I have an ION/Atom board and it has difficulties playing back 1080p video... so take that for whatever its worth
You are so wrong that it wouldn't be funny except for the fact that you said you "build computers every day for a living."
A dual core Celeron is indeed a Core 2 architecture CPU. Intel even says so right here! It is "Conroe based" just like the Core 2 Duo. Your dual core E1400 would totally destroy the Atom in pure performance.
Read this review of the D510 (same thing as D525 but only 1.66GHz). You can see the Intel Celeron 420 (1.6GHz) beating the D510 in many benchmarks even with merely a single core, with less MHz and less cache.
Well, that's the most important thing right? It does what you want it to do.
Hey, can you see what overclocking options it has in BIOS? I'd like to compare it to what the older D510 version has, like what I posted earlier in this thread. That would really be helpful to the community since the board you got is a new one and to my knowledge nobody else has posted that kind of info on it.
Architecture is a huge thing and you can throw out the rest of the specs when comparing processors if architecture isn't the same. It's the same reason an old Pentium 4 will not outperform any modern CPU. If you really think that a 3.73ghz Pentium Extreme Edition will outperform a mobile 2ghz Core i7 for example (both have the same amount of cache and number of cores), then you are severely mistaken. Conroe was the codename for the original batch of Core 2 Duo processors and that Celeron chip is Core 2 based. Just because it doesn't say Core 2, doesn't mean it isn't one. Xeon CPUs are a good example. They use a different name, but there are still a plethora of Core 2 based ones around.
Going by specs on sheet alone, the Atom D525 @ 2.0ghz should outperform the E1400. The E1500 has 512mb L2, 2.0ghz, two physical cores. The D525 has 1MB L2 cache, two physical cores, and two more virtual cores. Therefor it should run better. Not to mention runs cooler and uses WAY less wattage.
Yes, Atom uses less wattage. Yes, Atom puts out less heat, but "runs cooler" has to do with the cooling on it. I temporarily unplugged the fan on my Gigabyte D510 and boy that Atom got toasty! I'm talking probably 80°C.
Performance-wise you are very, very wrong.
I don't know why you would keep digging your hole there, but I've provided a review link showing the Atom to underperform compared to single core Celerons.
Yes, performance is not the same (or more) performance as a 4MB cache Conroe with higher FSB. It is also not the same (or less) performance as any Atom.
So if you click on thread tools you can then click on close thread.. You have the board & your opinion & Zap and BlueFox have no board & there opinion's.. There is no point in anyone arguing about it anymore.
Gotta pay for that feature.
Gotta pay for that feature.
really.. I thought the OP always had the ability.. Maybe thats just in the FS/T forum.. I hadn't ever tried to close a thread other then there before I bought my lifetime membership thingy..
Yeah I'm really wishing people would GTFO
heh.. there is no reason to join any forum where you interact with other people if you cant take that peoples opinions differ from yours. Just accept it, know that your not always right & move on..
You're the one that brought on all the hostility. I guess ignorance is bliss though. You were disputing facts, not our opinions. We can post away if we choose to do so as that's the point of a discussion forum and we would be doing a disservice to other members if we didn't point out inconsistencies if someone were to stumble across this thread in the future.
Cheezor722
Weaksauce
- Joined
- Mar 13, 2008
- Messages
- 82
This thread is hilarious. I love how all the OP's comments were editted out but you can read them all in the quotes.
OP, you should google "In-order architecture" and "Out of order architecture". That concept alone will illuminate why atom is inferior to core 2. There are multiple other non-clockspeed related design features that also need to be factored in. Computer architecture is a very complex subject, it cannot solely be summed up by looking at clockspeed, cache, and hyperthreading.
OP, you should google "In-order architecture" and "Out of order architecture". That concept alone will illuminate why atom is inferior to core 2. There are multiple other non-clockspeed related design features that also need to be factored in. Computer architecture is a very complex subject, it cannot solely be summed up by looking at clockspeed, cache, and hyperthreading.
This thread is hilarious. I love how all the OP's comments were editted out but you can read them all in the quotes.
OP, you should google "In-order architecture" and "Out of order architecture". That concept alone will illuminate why atom is inferior to core 2. There are multiple other non-clockspeed related design features that also need to be factored in. Computer architecture is a very complex subject, it cannot solely be summed up by looking at clockspeed, cache, and hyperthreading.
Dude.. stfu.. Why are you going to necro a thread just to rekindle a dead argument..
- Status