Stuck @ 450fsb.... Need a little help

E

eViL_M@LuM

Crosshair's Nephew
Joined
Aug 28, 2002
Messages
3,688
So here's my setup

Abit IP35 Pro
Mushkin 2x2gb 1066
Antec Trio 550
q6700 g0
gtx260 evga
CM 830 stacker Nvidia

so here's the issue. I thought my ram was holding me back some older d9ftb 2x2gb wouldnt go past 458 even at 2.6v.... So ordered some new Mushkin pc8500 2x2gb and still stuck at the same problem...

Voltages are as such

Cpu 1.52v
Ddr 2.3v
vtt 1.57
mch 1.64
qtl 0/2 70%
qtl 1/3 70%

trying to break 500fsb... just wanting 7x500 3500mhz... the cpu is stable at 3600 at the current voltage. Any help would be appreciated.
 
its the limitation of the chipset/northbridge.. 450FSB is probably the max it can handle.. try looking up some overclocks with that board and see if anyone else was able to exceed 450FSB on the board.. but my best bet is that 450 is the limit..
 
The overclocks i've seen and even some of the reviews are getting 500-550+fsb out of the board, but they've been with 8x and 9x series c2d/c2q's. I'm closely realizing it's the q6 holding me back.
 
If you want to exceed the 450 bottleneck, I think you'd need to go with active cooling on the bus itself. That is, stick a fan on it.
 
If MCH is the same as NB, wow that's a lot of voltage. Also with quads, you would need to pay attention more to GTLs. With your VTT that high, I believe your GTLs will also need to be high to match it.
 
I can't believe noone has mentioned that increasing the fsb this way is all but completely pointless on skt 775. Relax those voltages and run at 400fsb with a 9x multiplier if you want 3.6ghz. Higher FSB's are only useful in showing a tiny little improvement in extreme benchmarking, which you wouldn't likely be doing with a chip that old.

Stick with the 400fsb man and don't kill your chip trying to reach pointless fsb speeds
 
R-Type said:
I can't believe noone has mentioned that increasing the fsb this way is all but completely pointless on skt 775. Relax those voltages and run at 400fsb with a 9x multiplier if you want 3.6ghz. Higher FSB's are only useful in showing a tiny little improvement in extreme benchmarking, which you wouldn't likely be doing with a chip that old.

Stick with the 400fsb man and don't kill your chip trying to reach pointless fsb speeds
Click to expand...


awww.. come on.. 500 FSB is so 1337!!!.. your just jealous..



lol kidding.. had to do it though.. but you are right.. its pointless.. only reason to do it was if you had for example ddr2 1200 ram and a motherboard that only had a multiplier that took it up to 1066.. then it helps.. but thats it.. i still have no idea why people are so fixated on having a 1:1 timing on their ram.. it doesnt make a lick of difference in the real world..
 
sirmonkey1985 said:
lol kidding.. had to do it though.. but you are right.. its pointless.. only reason to do it was if you had for example ddr2 1200 ram and a motherboard that only had a multiplier that took it up to 1066.. then it helps.. but thats it.. i still have no idea why people are so fixated on having a 1:1 timing on their ram.. it doesnt make a lick of difference in the real world..
Click to expand...

1:1 used to make a huge difference in performance on older amd and intel systems, although it affected nforce chipsets the most. I understand it's not really the case anymore, but those whore run nvidia tend to still say it's a factor in overclocking and bandwidth.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top