2400+ 2500+ 2600+ Mobile Bartons back @ newegg

[Drizzy]

Damn I dont know what my systems problem is. I have all new RAM, PSU, Mobo, and 2400+ and I cant get it steady over 2364 unless I crank the volts. I've tried everything...

 

[ShinSa]

Originally posted by: edplayer

Originally posted by: ShinSa
I totally agree with you. Generally speaking people look for unlocked chips in order to lower their multiplier and increase the FSB. Assuming that all mobile chips lie with the CPU manufacturing theory, XP2400+ should reach higher FSB than the rest.

how do you figure a 2400+ can get to a higher FSB than any other Athlon?

Intel and AMD do not manufacture chips knowing what the speed will be before it is finished. For example, they don't say let's make x number of yMhz chips. When cpus come off the assembly line, each manufacturer stress tests them and if they pass the test, they are packaged and sent to the retailers.

Now assuming they came off the same platter, XP2400+ XP2500+, XP2600+ might as well be the same chips but labeled differntly, in order for AMD to cover the high and low end of the market. If they label every chips as XP2600+, AMD will lose market shares in their lower end market. On the other hand, if they label all their chips as XP2400+, they are not maximizing their profits. (Speeds of the chips is arbitrary. They can be 10Ghz and 5Ghz).

Finally, it's been proven over time and time again tweaking parts of the components such as upping the voltage, upgrading the heatsinks and lowering the multiplier can yield higher FSB. Assuming that these XP2400+ were produced in the same batches as the rest of the mobile XPs, they should be able to reach higher FSB since they have a lower multiplier.

I hope this helps. IF you want more information, do a search on google. There are some better information that's beyond this scope.

 

[WallyKid]

Originally posted by: Drizzy
Damn I dont know what my systems problem is. I have all new RAM, PSU, Mobo, and 2400+ and I cant get it steady over 2364 unless I crank the volts. I've tried everything...

What voltage are you talking about? How much i mean. I thought you are already at the 2.4ghz mark.

 

[Drizzy]

Originally posted by: WallyKid

Originally posted by: Drizzy
Damn I dont know what my systems problem is. I have all new RAM, PSU, Mobo, and 2400+ and I cant get it steady over 2364 unless I crank the volts. I've tried everything...

What voltage are you talking about? How much i mean. I thought you are already at the 2.4ghz mark.

Yeah I can get it even up to 2.5 Ghz if I crank the vcore above 1.85. It will stay stable on Prime95 for like 5-10 hours @ 1.85 vcore 2.4 Ghz. I cant get it to pass my 24 hour test though. Since I dont want to push past 1.85 vcore I'm stuck. Right now I'm running @ 2.74 Ghz 1.80 vcore. Cant get any higher to stay stable.

 

[WallyKid]

Originally posted by: Drizzy

Originally posted by: WallyKid

Originally posted by: Drizzy
Damn I dont know what my systems problem is. I have all new RAM, PSU, Mobo, and 2400+ and I cant get it steady over 2364 unless I crank the volts. I've tried everything...

What voltage are you talking about? How much i mean. I thought you are already at the 2.4ghz mark.

Yeah I can get it even up to 2.5 Ghz if I crank the vcore above 1.85. It will stay stable on Prime95 for like 5-10 hours @ 1.85 vcore 2.4 Ghz. I cant get it to pass my 24 hour test though. Since I dont want to push past 1.85 vcore I'm stuck. Right now I'm running @ 2.74 Ghz 1.80 vcore. Cant get any higher to stay stable.

And you said you only have a 430 Trupower? Man....thats a really good CPU you got. I can't even push mine pass 2.2 to be stable.

 

[edplayer]

Originally posted by: ShinSa
Intel and AMD do not manufacture chips knowing what the speed will be before it is finished. For example, they don't say let's make x number of yMhz chips. When cpus come off the assembly line, each manufacturer stress tests them and if they pass the test, they are packaged and sent to the retailers.

Now assuming they came off the same platter, XP2400+ XP2500+, XP2600+ might as well be the same chips but labeled differntly, in order for AMD to cover the high and low end of the market. If they label every chips as XP2600+, AMD will lose market shares in their lower end market. On the other hand, if they label all their chips as XP2400+, they are not maximizing their profits. (Speeds of the chips is arbitrary. They can be 10Ghz and 5Ghz).

Finally, it's been proven over time and time again tweaking parts of the components such as upping the voltage, upgrading the heatsinks and lowering the multiplier can yield higher FSB. Assuming that these XP2400+ were produced in the same batches as the rest of the mobile XPs, they should be able to reach higher FSB since they have a lower multiplier.

I hope this helps. IF you want more information, do a search on google. There are some better information that's beyond this scope.

all of that made sense till you got to the "they should be able to reach higher FSB since they have a lower multiplier" part

These are multiplier unlocked cpus.

 

[Drizzy]

No I have a ThermalTake 480W Purepower. I shoulda gone with Antec or Enermax I think...

 

[ShinSa]

Originally posted by: edplayer

Originally posted by: ShinSa
Intel and AMD do not manufacture chips knowing what the speed will be before it is finished. For example, they don't say let's make x number of yMhz chips. When cpus come off the assembly line, each manufacturer stress tests them and if they pass the test, they are packaged and sent to the retailers.

Now assuming they came off the same platter, XP2400+ XP2500+, XP2600+ might as well be the same chips but labeled differntly, in order for AMD to cover the high and low end of the market. If they label every chips as XP2600+, AMD will lose market shares in their lower end market. On the other hand, if they label all their chips as XP2400+, they are not maximizing their profits. (Speeds of the chips is arbitrary. They can be 10Ghz and 5Ghz).

Finally, it's been proven over time and time again tweaking parts of the components such as upping the voltage, upgrading the heatsinks and lowering the multiplier can yield higher FSB. Assuming that these XP2400+ were produced in the same batches as the rest of the mobile XPs, they should be able to reach higher FSB since they have a lower multiplier.

I hope this helps. IF you want more information, do a search on google. There are some better information that's beyond this scope.

all of that made sense till you got to the "they should be able to reach higher FSB since they have a lower multiplier" part

These are multiplier unlocked cpus.

All cpus have a starting multiplier.
For example. My XP1600+ AGOIA has a multiplier of 10.5.
Unlocked CPUS just means that the user can change the multiplier to whatever he/she desires.

I was simply assuming that the user will leave the multiplier untouched.
If the user buys a higher cpu than the XP2400+, just to lower the multiplier, why didn't he/she just get the XP2400+ in the first place?
Which brings me back to my first post that It doesn't really make sense to dish out more for XP2500+ and XP2600+.

Now again, I must emphasize that we are assuming that the all mobile chips are produced from the same batch meaning they all have the same steppings, they were all made about the same time etc....

 

[edplayer]

Originally posted by: ShinSa
I was simply assuming that the user will leave the multiplier untouched.
If the user buys a higher cpu than the XP2400+, just to lower the multiplier, why didn't he/she just get the XP2400+ in the first place?
Which brings me back to my first post that It doesn't really make sense to dish out more for XP2500+ and XP2600+.

cause they are hoping it will reach a higher speed

If there is a lot of data on a place such as cpudatabase.com about mobile Bartons, we can get a good idea if the 2500+ and 2600+ oc better than the 2400+. As long as too many of the participants don't lie about it.

 

[ShinSa]

Originally posted by: edplayer

Originally posted by: ShinSa
I was simply assuming that the user will leave the multiplier untouched.
If the user buys a higher cpu than the XP2400+, just to lower the multiplier, why didn't he/she just get the XP2400+ in the first place?
Which brings me back to my first post that It doesn't really make sense to dish out more for XP2500+ and XP2600+.

cause they are hoping it will reach a higher speed

If there is a lot of data on a place such as cpudatabase.com about mobile Bartons, we can get a good idea if the 2500+ and 2600+ oc better than the 2400+. As long as too many of the participants don't lie about it.

I've already told you that I'm assuming that these chips came off the same line meaning they should all have a simmilar top off point.

"Now again, I must emphasize that we are assuming that the all mobile chips are produced from the same batch meaning they all have the same steppings, they were all made about the same time etc...."


I guess your thinking that by matching the chips with the same multiplier, XP2600+ will somehow reach higher FSB than XP2400+.
There is always that chance, and there is equally a chance that the XP2400+ will clock higher than XP2600+.
If by some flluke XP2500+ or XP2600+ did indeed overclock SIGNIFICANTLY better than the XP2400+ brother (SIGNIFICANTLY meaning couple hundred megahertz), it's because the above statement is false, meaning they came off differnt assembly line a t differnt times (Highly unlikely!!!)

Also keep in mind that the overclocking community was established to obtain a better bang for bux.
Why would any overclokckers dish out $100 just for a 50/50 chance that it will perform better than a $70 chip?

People are out to find AMD chips that cost $50 bux that can kick the crap out of Intel chips costing over $200.
If I had the money, I wouldn't be posting on this forum to begin with.
I'd be crusising along with one of these babys.
$700 chip


If somepeople want to go out a burchase a $45 Swiftech heatsink to put on theri $70 Xp2500+ barton, that's their choice.
Personally, I've always been a strong advocate of GC68 which costs $5.


Now on a side note:
If history is any proof, then XP2400+ should be the best FSB overclocker.

Celeron 300A was able to clock better than 333, 366, and 400 (most 300A went to 450 on default voltage)
Celeron 566 was able to clock better than 600, 633, 666 (my 566 went up to 850 )
Xp1600 palomino clocked better than XP1700, and Xp1800. (mine went up to ONLY 158 but the PC2100 infineon rams were holding me back)
XP2500 barton clocks better than XP2600, XP2700 (people are doing 200FSB easily with NF7S with default voltage and stock heatsinks right now)
P4 1.8A clocked better than .... u know what. (Intel fans know that 1.8 northwood did 2.4 without breaking a sweat)

Generally speaking, the sweet spot of overclocking chips are at the bottom of the group where there's a big headroom to go up.

 

[edplayer]

Originally posted by: ShinSa
I've already told you that I'm assuming that these chips came off the same line meaning they should all have a simmilar top off point.

"Now again, I must emphasize that we are assuming that the all mobile chips are produced from the same batch meaning they all have the same steppings, they were all made about the same time etc...."

negative sir

chips from the outer edges of the wafer have a higher tendency to be defective and will likely not perform (oc/undervolt whatever you choose) as well as chips from teh center

 

[ElFenix]

If somepeople [sic] want to go out a [sic] burchase [sic] a $45 Swiftech heatsink [sic] to put on theri [sic] $70 Xp2500+ barton, that's their choice.

nothing wrong with the $45 swiftech heat sink

 

[ShinSa]

Originally posted by: edplayer

Originally posted by: ShinSa
I've already told you that I'm assuming that these chips came off the same line meaning they should all have a simmilar top off point.

"Now again, I must emphasize that we are assuming that the all mobile chips are produced from the same batch meaning they all have the same steppings, they were all made about the same time etc...."

negative sir

chips from the outer edges of the wafer have a higher tendency to be defective and will likely not perform (oc/undervolt whatever you choose) as well as chips from teh center

edplayer, It seems that although I have made every effort to enlighten you, you are not please with my forthcoming. While you are welcomed to continue to pick away at others commments, your immaturity towards me is a proof of your ignorance. This post which was totally off topic is a proof of this.

I'm beginning to wonder why I even bothered to reply to your post.

 

[edplayer]

Originally posted by: ShinSa
Why would any overclokckers dish out $100 just for a 50/50 chance that it will perform better than a $70 chip?

cause they are nerds???

It sounds like you know a decent amount about overclocking. Are you seriously gonna tell me you never heard/read about overclockers spending more on a cpu that they think has a better chance of overclocking?

Originally posted by: ShinSa
Generally speaking, the sweet spot of overclocking chips are at the bottom of the group where there's a big headroom to go up.

this comment essentially negates your whole "they should overclock about the same" argument

 

[ShinSa]

Originally posted by: ElFenix

If somepeople [sic] want to go out a [sic] burchase [sic] a $45 Swiftech heatsink [sic] to put on theri [sic] $70 Xp2500+ barton, that's their choice.

nothing wrong with the $45 swiftech heat sink

I never said that there was anything wrong with it. I'm using an Alpha PAL8045 myself which set me back $30 bux.

 

[edplayer]

Originally posted by: ShinSa
edplayer, It seems that although I have made every effort to enlighten you, you are not please with my forthcoming. While you are welcomed to continue to pick away at others commments, your immaturity towards me is a proof of your ignorance. This post which was totally off topic is a proof of this.

I'm beginning to wonder why I even bothered to reply to your post.

how was that reply in any way immature?

Just because I disagreed with you does not mean that it was an immature post? Are you going to claim that chips from every area of the wafer are gonna perform the same?

 

[edplayer]

Originally posted by: ShinSa
This post which was totally off topic is a proof of this.

and that reply was not off-topic

it was to inform you (and others who are reading this thread) that not every chip from a wafer (coming off from the same line as you say) will clock the same

 

[sheemone00]

noob question what is "burning in the processor" ???

 

[John]

Originally posted by: sheemone00
noob question what is "burning in the processor" ???

A myth.

 

[sheemone00]

what is this myth?

 

[phlashphire]

If somepeople want to go out a burchase a $45 Swiftech heatsink to put on theri $70 Xp2500+ barton, that's their choice.
Personally, I've always been a strong advocate of GC68 which costs $5

Can you use a GC68 on this 2400+ (Since it suppose to run cooler)? Cuz that's what I currently have, and if the GC68 isn't good enough, I'm wondering what would be a good cheap hsf to use this.

 

[StarTech]

Anybody knows if this CPUs will run on the M7NCG 400 with adequate flexibility? I mean multiplier, voltage control...?

 

[Drizzy]

Originally posted by: John

Originally posted by: sheemone00
noob question what is "burning in the processor" ???

A myth.

LOL a myth? well, you havent done much overclocking I guess. If you go to arctic silvers own site they have in there that you have to run your cpu for a long time for the thermal compound to get to 100% effectiveness. Just one of the ways burning your cpu is effective at getting higher OC'ing speeds.

"Due to the unique shape and sizes of the particles in Arctic Silver 5's conductive matrix, it will take a up to 200 hours and several thermal cycles to achieve maximum particle to particle thermal conduction and for the heatsink to CPU interface to reach maximum conductivity."

Arctic Silver Link

I'm sure this is true to a degree on any thermalpaste.

 

[Berkut]

This is going to sound pretty stupid, but oh welll....

I currently have a AMD 1700+. My motherboard is some kind of Soltek, and I am not sure what kind. Two questions:

1. Can I run one of these MP Bartons in this board, and

2. How in the hell can I find out exactly what board I actually have?

 

[Justus]

To berkut:

I would suggest you downloading Sisoft Sandra, or Aida32. Both of these utilities will tell you what motherboard you are running.

Nobody is stupid, they just don't know yet. Better to admit it; shows brains.