.

[TurtleCrusher]

.

 

[A554SS1N]

There should be settings that lower the multiplier for the RAM so it doesn't get too high a clock, possibly even to fix it at default PC6400 speeds, as I can only see that as limiting you at the moment if that keeps rising. You should be able to easily raise the FSB then, although it'll probably need a small vcore increase at some point.

 

[TurtleCrusher]

Originally posted by: A554SS1N
There should be settings that lower the multiplier for the RAM so it doesn't get too high a clock, possibly even to fix it at default PC6400 speeds, as I can only see that as limiting you at the moment if that keeps rising. You should be able to easily raise the FSB then, although it'll probably need a small vcore increase at some point.

So you are saying i should lower my multiplier to 6 and have a 418mhz overclock to achieve the same clock speed that i have now? So, use the 6x multiplier and keep moving up? could having too high of a FSB could be damaging?

 

[Xcobra]

No. He is saying you should lower the FSB:RAM ratio. The 2:2 ratio it has is keeping it in sync with the FSB, thus OCing it. Your RAM probably doesnt clock that high. Keep multiplier at 7, just lower RAM divider.

 

[TurtleCrusher]

Originally posted by: Xcobra
No. He is saying you should lower the FSB:RAM ratio. The 2:2 ratio it has is keeping it in sync with the FSB, thus OCing it. Your RAM probably doesnt clock that high. Keep multiplier at 7, just lower RAM divider.

Isn't that what i just did? Also, if i OC the FSB to 400mhz, where my ram is rated, i'll be at 2800Mhz. Is this something i should push for or am i pressing my luck?

 

[error8]

Originally posted by: Scholzpdx

Originally posted by: Xcobra
No. He is saying you should lower the FSB:RAM ratio. The 2:2 ratio it has is keeping it in sync with the FSB, thus OCing it. Your RAM probably doesnt clock that high. Keep multiplier at 7, just lower RAM divider.

Isn't that what i just did? Also, if i OC the FSB to 400mhz, where my ram is rated, i'll be at 2800Mhz. Is this something i should push for or am i pressing my luck?

O come on, do you really think a 2.8 ghz is such a great deal of overclocking?

The problem with your chip is that it has the lowest multiplier possible and so this makes it the worst overclocking quad from Intel, you could have. Make a run for 3 ghz. I believe your motherboard should be able to do 428 fsb with this chip and probably the ram too. Now, beyond that is a bit more tricky, since very few mobos can hit that high FSB values with quad cores.

I would test the ram, to see how high does it run and then push the FSB as high as you can, but without cranking the voltages too much.

 

[Phunk0ne]

Don't want to be a showstopper, but why hasn't anyone warned the poor fellow of using a STOCK COOLER!?!?!?!

Seriously, OP, before you are going to do any more overclocking, it would make a very very wise decision to get yourself a different cooler. And I mean . . .FAST!

for now, revert back to stock everything and start overclocking again when you have replaced your stock cooler, please!

 

[error8]

Originally posted by: Phunk0ne
Don't want to be a showstopper, but why hasn't anyone warned the poor fellow of using a STOCK COOLER!?!?!?!

Seriously, OP, before you are going to do any more overclocking, it would make a very very wise decision to get yourself a different cooler. And I mean . . .FAST!

for now, revert back to stock everything and start overclocking again when you have replaced your stock cooler, please!

Hmmmm, how the hell did we missed that?

Use an aftermarket cooler OP. I was under the impression that you already did that....I don't know why...

 

[TurtleCrusher]

Originally posted by: error8

Originally posted by: Scholzpdx

Originally posted by: Xcobra
No. He is saying you should lower the FSB:RAM ratio. The 2:2 ratio it has is keeping it in sync with the FSB, thus OCing it. Your RAM probably doesnt clock that high. Keep multiplier at 7, just lower RAM divider.

Isn't that what i just did? Also, if i OC the FSB to 400mhz, where my ram is rated, i'll be at 2800Mhz. Is this something i should push for or am i pressing my luck?

O come on, do you really think a 2.8 ghz is such a great deal of overclocking?

The problem with your chip is that it has the lowest multiplier possible and so this makes it the worst overclocking quad from Intel, you could have. Make a run for 3 ghz. I believe your motherboard should be able to do 428 fsb with this chip and probably the ram too. Now, beyond that is a bit more tricky, since very few mobos can hit that high FSB values with quad cores.

I would test the ram, to see how high does it run and then push the FSB as high as you can, but without cranking the voltages too much.

Ah thanks for the tip. I think 2.8Ghz would definitely be sufficient. It would be about as fast as a Q6600 at 3ghz, so i'll take that performance anyday.

I specifically chose this motherboard because it looked like a good overclocker. I bought (what i think) is decent ram and i made sure to get an affordable, energy efficient quad core. Im thinking 3Ghz might be pushing it, as i want this system to last a good decade (later years to be just office work or a HTPC).

I'll be buying an aftermarket cooler real soon. Any good CHEAP recommendations? I think i'm going to keep it at my overclock now as the temps are exactly the same as stock speeds. As it never hits above 60C, even while playing DiRT, Crysis:Warhead or NBA 2K9.

 

[Phunk0ne]

OP,

if you want your cpu to last a while.. I don't see the reason to OC it. Overclocking means you're giving the cpu more juice to achieve a higher speed. because you're juicing up your CPU, this in turn means the degradation of your cpu in a much faster rate. Those 70C temperature readings are definitely going to help your CPU die an earlier death.

Heatsink on the cheap, and definitely beats Intel stock heatsink: Arctic Freezer 7 Pro.