Anyone running a system thats not prime/orthos stable, but works fine for everyday use like heavy gaming and other tasking functions. I have my cpu @ 4ghz @ 1.32v and its 100 % stable for the things i use my computer for. However, if i run prime95/orthos it fails without 1 minute. i know i could up my voltage and itll make it prime stable, but whats the reason if my system works fine for me @ this voltage.
![[H]ard|Forum](/styles/hardforum/xenforo/logo_dark.png){kind=logo}
not prime stable.....
- Thread starter s4rge
- Start date
Technophobe
Limp Gawd
- Joined
- Feb 25, 2008
- Messages
- 339
I think its a case of whatever you're happy with.
Going down the road to get your system 'really' stable can be a long one. It was quite easy for me to get normal Windows apps (inc games) stable at low voltages.
Some people just can't say they have a stable system unless they get 12+ hours Prime / Orthos stable (i.e. me). Another test program which shows problems quickly is OCCT - run this with CPU and CPU/RAM at high priority - it shows up problems very quickly.
Going down the road to get your system 'really' stable can be a long one. It was quite easy for me to get normal Windows apps (inc games) stable at low voltages.
Some people just can't say they have a stable system unless they get 12+ hours Prime / Orthos stable (i.e. me). Another test program which shows problems quickly is OCCT - run this with CPU and CPU/RAM at high priority - it shows up problems very quickly.
Depends on whether this meets your objectives/requirements.
- If you're folding, video processing or doing something that requires heavy computation and this saves you valuable time (without crashing too often), then your 4Ghz is great.
- If it's heavy gaming, ... lol... you don't need 4Ghz. Considering it doesn't benefit you "at all", since most modern games are normally GPU restricted, why risk an increased chance of BSOD's for nothing? So you could say this isn't really a valid objective.
- If it's to say "look I have a 4Ghz PC!!" - I can understand wanting to have a powerful PC, that this is a valid requirement/objective. But then then expect people to ask "is it stable"? And make sure it does not undermine your happiness when you have to say honestly "no it is not stable, but it's stable enough for me".
As the previous poster said, it is a case of whatever you're happy with at the end of the day.
- If you're folding, video processing or doing something that requires heavy computation and this saves you valuable time (without crashing too often), then your 4Ghz is great.
- If it's heavy gaming, ... lol... you don't need 4Ghz. Considering it doesn't benefit you "at all", since most modern games are normally GPU restricted, why risk an increased chance of BSOD's for nothing? So you could say this isn't really a valid objective.
- If it's to say "look I have a 4Ghz PC!!" - I can understand wanting to have a powerful PC, that this is a valid requirement/objective. But then then expect people to ask "is it stable"? And make sure it does not undermine your happiness when you have to say honestly "no it is not stable, but it's stable enough for me".
As the previous poster said, it is a case of whatever you're happy with at the end of the day.
I used to say "F--- Prime95" but now I don't. Why? Because my K8N Diamond Plus died after a year of overclocking. The defect, as it turns out, was a bad PCI lock that gave out, causing the onboard as well as any addin soundcard to not work. MSI said that this should not have happened, but I was getting MACHINE_CHECK errors and BSoD but ignoring them because I wanted 2.6GHz out of an Opteron 170.
My Q6600 runs Prime95 error-free for 12.5 hours at 3GHz. Now why I can't get past 3GHz is another question...
My Q6600 runs Prime95 error-free for 12.5 hours at 3GHz. Now why I can't get past 3GHz is another question...
heatlesssun
Extremely [H]
- Joined
- Nov 5, 2005
- Messages
- 44,154
If your rig is crashing 1 minute into a Prime 95 run, you really don't have a stable system. Back off your overclock until you get Prime 95 running stable for at least 4 hours. While you may never have any other issues, you are taking a risk. If you find the risk acceptable then thats cool. Just understand that your system isnt really stable and that you could have problems down the road.
Even if your system isn't crashing that doesn't mean it's processing commands properly. I had one system that was overclocked that trashed every single one of my MP3s when I copied them to a new HD. So I try to ensure it's as stable as possible. (I don't overclock my media storage computer anymore... heh)
aethelwulf
[H]ard|Gawd
- Joined
- Nov 20, 2007
- Messages
- 1,938
And that's the problem. Most programs aren't going to check if the processor did its calculations correctly, and you might not find out until it's too late.
I'd say that if you can format and run through a clean install of XP, it's "relatively stable". I have an old habit of running everything at stock for XP installs, but the last time I did (around February 08), I "forgot".
The difference is this time I had been running OCCT, and not short little runs of P95 (<12hours). Hell, I've had 20hr P95 runs (overnighters) and they didn't tell me shit when my XP-M OC was unstable until was too late. CS:S crashed out and soon, by OS install was completely hosed. I was much more careful when I was with my Opteron, but it wasn't until I was OCing with Core2, that was I EVEN more careful. I mean, when an Intel OC fails, it doesn't just crash. It hardlocks - crashing and burning.
Kind of sad when you compare it to AMD - which most of the time I was able to close out and have S/W shutdown (not BSOD/restart - which is common with Core2). *Shrug*
Anyway, to make the story short, if you indeed have a solid, stable OC - it should be absolutely transparent. No "easing down" for XP install or other precarious activities
The difference is this time I had been running OCCT, and not short little runs of P95 (<12hours). Hell, I've had 20hr P95 runs (overnighters) and they didn't tell me shit when my XP-M OC was unstable until was too late. CS:S crashed out and soon, by OS install was completely hosed. I was much more careful when I was with my Opteron, but it wasn't until I was OCing with Core2, that was I EVEN more careful. I mean, when an Intel OC fails, it doesn't just crash. It hardlocks - crashing and burning.
Kind of sad when you compare it to AMD - which most of the time I was able to close out and have S/W shutdown (not BSOD/restart - which is common with Core2). *Shrug*
Anyway, to make the story short, if you indeed have a solid, stable OC - it should be absolutely transparent. No "easing down" for XP install or other precarious activities
Ocellaris
Fully [H]
- Joined
- Jan 1, 2008
- Messages
- 19,075
If it consistently crashes in less than a minute, then your overclock is basically trash. That is just begging for a system problem to creep up, I would not put anything important on that PC. Heck even resinstalling the games would be too much of a pain in the ass for me to deal with.
But hey, grats on being able to say "I got a 4GHz system"
But hey, grats on being able to say "I got a 4GHz system"