Nice work with the e2180 cpemma Is there any reason why these two HWBot threads aren't stickies anymore? Bit-tech is sitting low in the overall rankings yet we have lots of members with very quick systems. To be honest, I'd completely forgotten about them until a couple of people added new benchies over the last few days. I think that it adds another element to the site as well as being a bit of fun. We (bit-tech members) can battle against each other, as well as hopefully raising Bit-tech's HWBot rating by beating other teams. In turn, this obviously raises the site's profile and may bring in new members. You can't discount the advantage of having lots of people with experience in overclocking various hardware setups either. It could greatly add to the pool of quality overclocking information available to the bit-tech community as a whole. On this basis, I hereby request that the two threads are made stickies! (please )
what the hell i said! Core 2 Duo T7250 @ 2ghz 2 gig generic DELL Ram I Guess Inspiron 1720 if that helps! edit: erm... [hwbot] Bogomip - 27.565 - Core 2 Duo T7250 @ 2ghz, 2 gig ram @ 633mhz [/hwbot]
i second those! for Intel systems, will memory timing matter much?? can boot into Vista at 4Ghz on quad core with 50:50 chance, and Memtest86 failed at 4Ghz, with a LOT more Vcore than required, so im guessing i need better RAM. tryed 900Mhz 5-6-6-18 for 3.9Ghz, but didn't get any major improvement in scores than the one posted earlier. (which was 5-5-5-15)
Well, it's all relative. In general, Intel systems respond better to raw frequency than they do tight timings (which is why 1000Mhz 5-5-5-15 is generally more desirable than 800Mhz 4-4-4-12). But at the same time, loosening timings too much can mean diminishing returns for the increase in frequency. Therefore (like much in overclocking) it really comes down to a bit of trial and error with your own system. Oh and thank you for making this thread a sticky, whatever kind soul did it! Just need to move the 3DMark06 one up here now (I think it's feeling neglected way down the page there
As I've now got a system with which I can sneer at the son-in-law's expensive new Dell Q6600 I hereby stick this!
Yeah I think I'm maxed, tried to pull a bit more out but wasn't stable at all, might give it another go since I got a new motherboard.
How is your 3GB ram configured? You might get better super-pi speeds running 2GB in dual channel (depending on your setup of course).
[hwbot] play_boy_2000 - 11.903s - Intel e8400 @ 3.93GHz (on water) OCZ pc6400 - 437Mhz 5-5-5-15 Asus Maximus Formula [/hwbot] Fresh install of windows vista ultimate sp1. Was rock solid at 3.9Ghz but wouldn't load @ 4.0 due to ram instability, so I backed off a bit and got this. Could probably squeeze a bit more out. Click for bigger image
Our times are pretty much in line with the clock speeds. 3.1 beats 3.05, but in the real world there's so little difference I normally run at 2.9GHz, needs far less Vcore so cooler and quieter.
LOL, I must be psychic! I updated the HWBot leaderboard for you and you are now officially Bit-tech's #1 (by quite a stretch). Congrats
ah, no! im out of top 5 i cannot get 4Ghz on my quad core because i can't get the whole system to be stable, even at x6. so im guessing the RAM is olding me back RAM was only stable at 5-6-6-18 @ 870 (3.9Ghz CPU) that's with 2.2v, max OCZ will warrant.
sorry, meant i cannot get 4GHz to be stable at x9, because i can't get the whole system to be stable, not even when at same FSB, CPU x6.
Ahh, I see. Well, could be ram (likely) but then again could be the limit of your CPU (also likely), an FSB wall with the CPU (less likely but still possible) or Mobo (very unlikely). Can't seem to get mine up to 4Ghz even at 1:1, and the ram is good for 1000Mhz 5-5-5-15. Means either my CPU is either at it's limit/FSB walled or the mobo's not good for 445 FSB (which I doubt). You could of course relax the timings further on the ram (go cas 6). It won't improve your times but it may show if it's the ram or not.
Nice stuff JoeJones . I updated our HWBot rating and you're sitting 2nd. Bit-tech has gone from 63rd to 59th since this was stickied!
