Intel P!!! Coppermine 800E Overclocking

Jun 23, 2000
82
0
0
I am planning on an Intel P!!! Coppermine 800E and thinking about running it at 133 Mhz FSB. This would, in theory put me over the 1 Ghz margin. We all know Intel has had trouble with their processors over 1 Ghz. Does anyone have any experience with this. Has anyone overclocled an 800 to over 1Ghz. What about an 850?
 

KarsinTheHutt

Golden Member
Jun 28, 2000
1,687
0
0
Hmm... I think you'll have better luck with a 750e

750 * 133 = 1000 MHz
800 *133 = 1066 MHz which is reaching the limits of a cb0 stepping p3's tolerence.

OCing an 850e is pretty much out of the question unless you have an outrageous amount of cooling. Go with the 750 OC to 1000 and save yourself a lot of headache.
 

subhuman

Senior member
Aug 24, 2000
956
0
0
yeah 800 isnt the greatest, you almost definitely won't hit 1066mhz. a 700e has a better tolerance since 933 is very, very likely and higher is usually possible. 750 MIGHT make it to 1000, that's probably the 2nd best choice.
 

Sunny129

Diamond Member
Nov 14, 2000
4,823
6
81
I have a P3 800EB which i havent even used yet, but with all of these nightmare stories i'm hearing about the overclockability of any P3 800 CPU, i'm exchanging it for a P3 700 w/ cC0 stepping. not to say a P3 800EB isnt OCable if you can push the fsb beyond 133 mHz, but from what i hear its a royal pain in the !ss. and the P3 800 @ 100 fsb should have better OC capabilities than the 800EB, but most threads i've come across on the topic have posts from many people saying its a mistake to get a P3 800 (E or EB) over the 700 or 750. even if you do get a good overclock with and 800 or 850, it wont last long without special cooling...
 

Kelv

Junior Member
Nov 5, 2000
24
0
0
See your other post for difference between cB0 and cC0 =)

Anyways, don't think overclocking is guarenteed though... like, I've got a cB0 700e on CUSL2 that can only do 875 at 1.75Vs... and I think 933 at 1.85 Vs.

So u want something that's pretty safe overclock wif good performance? Try 800B or something... I mean, you can up the FSB from 133 to like 150 or even 160 (providing you've got good RAM and a good stable board like my CUSL2). This gives you like 960MHz, and although you are like 40 short of a Gig mark, you have 160FSB which means your system would probably kick the geniune 133FSB 1Ghz Pentium.

Dun think it hasn't been done before though... Tomshardware did an article on 166FSB on the CUSL2.

Cheers man
 

KR

Senior member
Oct 9, 1999
324
0
0
Sunny-

I've seen the same posts that recommend a PIII 700E over an 800E 100FSB. I think that the general consensus is that the 800's do reach 900+ MHZ pretty easily but not with a nice even multiple of 33MHZ which can cause problems with some peripherals due to the non-standard FSB.

My take on the success rate for the 800's is that they reach 935 quite well but need a 117FSB to do it. Maybe I'm lucky or willing to sacrifice a small amount of total throughput but I am running a PIII 800E/935 MHZ at 1.7V on an ABIT BX6R2. While it's true that with the 117/4 (29 MHZ) PCI speed that is derived from that clocking I'm giving up a small amount of PCI performance I'm still seeing Disk transfer rates that are equal to what I had with a true 33MHZ bus (using my older Maxtor UDMA33 drives that won't go over 33MHZ PCI). Yes, I'm able to get full UDMA33 performance with DMA enabled - I expected it to be less but it's not.

Another nice benefit of the mild overclock is that it only took a tiny bump of the Vcore from the default 1.65 to 1.7V. Temperatures are generally 4C less than what I was seeing with a Celeron 300A @ 450 MHZ and with improved stability (my occasional - weekly - hangs have virtually stopped).

Since I'm limited in what I spend on computer stuff, it was also nice to be able to use my PC100 (rated cas3 at 125) so I didn't have to invest in faster memory though again, I'm sacrificing about 10% of the memory performance possible by running CAS3 - but memory is still dropping so I may still go for some CAS2 stuff. (It also appears that caching hides much of the memory latency speed difference - at least in benchmarks)

I've run the system at 124FSB and it runs well there but with the Vcore needing to go to 1.85V I've opted to stay at 117FSB (vcore 1.70) - 57 MHZ is less than an 8% hit in speed so it's almost lost in the noise level.

With unlimited funds I'd of-course go for a new motherboard with asynchronus FSB/MEM timing, 1/2 FSB AGP, millions of FSB choices, etc... buy a bunch of PC133+ memory... replace my older UDMA33 drives with UDMA100 drives and upgrade to a 4X AGP Gforce Ultra - and go for the gigahertz overclock but then I'd be spending something close to $600 more than just a processor($180) and only be 10% faster than I am now running. I can always add the Gforce and get pretty good results at AGPX2.

Overall, I'd say that if you're going from a 450MHZ system to at least an 800MHZ system (and likely 900+) the PIII 800E is a very good choice. Actually, An excellent choice.

I also agree that if you're looking to upgrade a BX chipset based system, the PIII-800EB is a terrible choice - You're already overclocking the chipset (though it will usually work), needing to upgrade the memory to PC133 and pushing your AGP before you even start to overclock the processor just to get it running at default speed.
 

Sunny129

Diamond Member
Nov 14, 2000
4,823
6
81
KR,

unfortunately, i already have the 800EB, so unlike the 800E, i think it will be far from an excellent OCer. no worries though...i am exchanging it for a 700E. had i bought the 800E in the first place, i might not have gone through with the exchange considering the info you provided on the "excellent" overclockability of the 800E. but since i'm definitely returning the 800EB, i might as well get the 700E over the 800E for a better OC (not to mention less worries about cooling than thrying to OC the same percentage starting @ 800 mHz). as for thr mobo...i dont plan on upgrading to another BX board, infact i have a CUSL2 just waiting for that 700E cC0. my current system specs are just the junkie system i have to live with until i have the time and components to build my new and MUCH improved system...thanks for all the advice though...much appreciated
 

KR

Senior member
Oct 9, 1999
324
0
0
Special Cooling? Not for 935MHZ

Again, maybe I was lucky but in my case with 1.7V Vcore there wasn't much extra heat produced and the retail HSF works fine at 935MHZ overclock. Though I've switched from the retail HSF to a golden orb ($12) hoping to get a stable 992MHZ (yes, it works there too but with higher voltage and more heat and even posts at 1032 MHZ - but won't boot) I'm happy with the 935MHZ results.

You're fortunate to have the CUSL2, from what I've heard/read it's an excellent overclocking board and should provide you with good results hope you get one of the "lucky" chips!

 

Sunny129

Diamond Member
Nov 14, 2000
4,823
6
81
KR,

my mistake...i should have been more specific with the percentage overclock. what i meant is that if i OC a 700E by 44%-50%, it would yield 1008-1050 mHz (which many people are accomplishing with the 700E). however a 44%-50% OC with an 800E would yield 1152-1200 mHz, which i'm almost positive would require some sort of liquid or refridgerated cooling. not to say that a 700E wouldnt need that kind of cooling @ 1008-1050 mHz, but a fair amount of people are saying that their OCed 700E's are hitting those speeds with air cooling only. not to mention i plan on getting one with the new cC0 stepping, one of the benefits of which is less heat production at higher clock rates.

Now a 800E OCed to 935 is approximately a 17% OC, which certainly does not need special cooling. Likewise, a 17% OC on a 700E would only yield 818 mHz, also with no special cooling involved. my point being that i plan on pushing my 700E quite a bit more than just 17% above its factory recommended clock frequency. i have a much better chance of a 45%-50% OC with a 700E than an 800E using air cooling only. i have a Gorb, and i dont plan on upgrading my cooling solution unless i get desperate...
 

KR

Senior member
Oct 9, 1999
324
0
0
Yours is an interesting philosophy - that you're more likely to get a 45 - 50% overclock on a pIII 700E than on an 800E. I agree with you completely on that. However, the likelihood of getting much beyond 950MHZ is probably not quite the same with either chip. Remember, these are both essentially the same device, tested to meet certain guaranteed run rates when they are tested at the factory.

Intel themselves has pretty much admitted that getting more than about a MHZ from the PIII core is not reasonably assured - remember, they pulled everything above 1GHZ from the PIII offerings.

I'm guessing (and this is purely a guess) that a device must run at it's marked speed +/- 15% reliably for it to be sold by Intel at that speed - 15% seems like a reasonable margin?

With that being the case, I'd be fairly confident that a 700MHZ device will run at 785 or even 800 - and if the yields are good in general, many will exceed that by two to three times the margin - up to maybe 933MHZ (yes, I picked this number because of the high number of successful 933 MHZ overclocks)... and occasionally even 1000 MHZ. It appears that 933 is being seen in about 70% of the devices so the core appears to be pretty much a nice solid 933MHZ device.

Maybe 20% of the devices that make it to 933 will also run at the magical 1000MHZ. Many of these are probably pulled by Intel to meet their requirements for 1000 MHZ devices. The rest of the "hot chips" get configured and sold as other speed devices - someone may be able to confirm this but I think the actual device ID is written in a writable control store on the chip - after it's been tested and it's speed determined and if they only need 700MHZ chips on "tuesday" they'll only test to 700 MHZ specs, regardless of the potential of the devices.

If the same margins are expected of an 800 MHZ device, I'd expect all 800 MHZ devices to be able to run at rated speed +/- margin. If the margin is 15%, I'd expect essentially all 800 MHZ devices would run at 920MHZ. Again, if yields are similar, there would be about 20% of the 800MHZ devices capable of 950 - 1000 MHZ.

Rather than looking at the likelihood of a percentage of overclock, I'm a lot more comfortable with the idea that a chip has proven to run reliably at a higher speed +/- margin tests will have a better chance of running at or near the tested and proven margin tested speed.

Naturally, my reasoning could be flawed but for now I'd say that a higher percentage of 800 MHZ devices are likely to run at speeds exceeding 900 MHZ than 700MHZ devices reaching the same speed. Overclockers.com's database seems to be confirming my thinking with nearly 90% of the 800's reaching an average speed in excess of 900MHZ and a somewhat lower percentage of 700's reaching the 900's.

Not too surprisingly, since they are essentially the same device, most of the "E" devices run up to about a gig maximum (850MHZ average) and up to almost 1.2 gig with extreme cooling. For the higher spec'd chips the average was a bit higher than devices spec'd lower.
 

Sunny129

Diamond Member
Nov 14, 2000
4,823
6
81
KR,

you are quite right that the probability of both the 700E or 800E surpassing the 950 mHz mark is low. however, doing so with a 700E would be a 250 mHz OC, whereas it is only a 150 mHz OC with the 800E. i'll ne paying less for the 700 than the 800, so i am getting the same speed for a lower price. also, there is just too much talk about the P3 700E being the sweet spot for OCing, and too many success stories to pass up the 700E.

as far as intels expectations go, you are correct about expecting a CPU to run +/- 15% or so within range of its factory recommended clock frequency. also, it is supposed to be capable of running that way for 7 years i believe...
 

han888

Golden Member
Apr 7, 2000
1,586
0
0
i have a good cpu here! my p3-800E run stable at 1000 mhz, i run setihome for 12 hour and the system is still stable here! and the other things is my pci bus speed run at 41 mhz, that force me to stay at 1066(133mhz , but not stable, just stable at windows application such as: surfing, chatting and etc)

================================
p3-800@1066 1.85v alpa pal30t
asus cusl2 1003.004 bios
256Mb hyundai pc133
asus gts V7700 denator 6.47
sblive value
 

Sunny129

Diamond Member
Nov 14, 2000
4,823
6
81
han888,

i hear people talking about setihome and RC5 all the time, but i haven't the slightest clue what either one is. the only thing i do know is that they are both CPU intensive software. can you or anyone else explain what the programs are about?
 

han888

Golden Member
Apr 7, 2000
1,586
0
0
hmmm.... i dont know how to explain it, because english is my second language, i just give u the hint! when the program run, it's force our cpu to work, and the cpu will getting hot! about the 700E or 800E i think it's all the same, it's depend our luck to have a good cpu or bad cpu! actually i have p3-700E on asus cuv4x too! the best i can do just 882! even with alpha pal35t or artic cooler ( currently use now!)

===================================
p3-800@1066 1.85v alpa pal30t
asus cusl2 1003.004 bios
256Mb hyundai pc133
asus gts V7700 denator 6.47
sblive value

p3-700@882 1.70 v artic cooller
asus cuv4x 1005
256Mb hyundai pc133
asus V7100 6.47
sblive value

 

KR

Senior member
Oct 9, 1999
324
0
0
Both RC5 and SETI at Home have been referred to as science projects.

RC5 is a distributed resource project using volunteer computer owners to run through the possible number combinations with the goal of determining the next undetermined "Prime" number.
Thousands of users have dedicated their unused cpu cycles (like when they're asleep and not using the computer) to accomplish this search. It is a highly cpu intensive application which ruses all available cpu time when operating but automatically goes almost idle when other applications are running.

SETI at Home is similar but each user gets a piece of received radio or radio telescope reception and free CPU cycles are used to attempt to find some itelligence in the received signals - something that is identifiable as being intentionally transmitted by an intelligent being (SETI - Search for Extra-Terrestrial Intelligence)

Both programs can be downloaded and run either together or individually - and both exercise your CPU, memory and main processing components at high load when rinning - and both move into the background when you are using your system so they don't dramatically effect most operations. They also give you some idea of how stable your system is when the CPU is fully occupied.
 

Sunny129

Diamond Member
Nov 14, 2000
4,823
6
81
i downloaded the setihome screensaver, but when i read the text file that came with it, it said that the executable is actually, SETI@home, and the screensaver is just a visual of the runnung program. i guess as long as i have the little green satellite in my system tray, the program is always running. i just question how much it uses the CPU b/c i never hear it working hard...

KR, do you like airplanes?
 

KR

Senior member
Oct 9, 1999
324
0
0
You won't hear it running - id seldom if ever uses the disk when it's running - just crunches numbers in the CPU and stores the results in a buffer to be uploaded to the server. If in fact it is running and you bring up the system monitor, you'll see that 100% of your system is in use - but only when you're not doing anything else.

Yes, I like Airplanes - work for an airplane company keeping the simulators "flying".
 

Sunny129

Diamond Member
Nov 14, 2000
4,823
6
81
ok i understand what going on wit hthe CPU now...i just closed everything but the SETI monitor and took a look at that...thanks

KR, what company do you work for? i run FS98 and use squakbox to fly online all the time. i love the Real Weather while using SB...
 

KR

Senior member
Oct 9, 1999
324
0
0
FS98 is probably the best 19.98 I've ever spent for a program. Excellent though I understand that 2000 is even better. Built a PC for my wife just so she could practice instrument procedures using FS98. The airplane company I work for is the one that starts with a very large "B". The sims are full flight with motion and 180 degree field of view visual systems - about $15,000,000 each for a new one. Great toys!
 

Sunny129

Diamond Member
Nov 14, 2000
4,823
6
81
i also heard that FS2K is better than FS98, but with all the aircraft and scenery i have installed in my game right now, i dont know if its really worth the hassle to upgrade...who am i kidding, it probably is worth it. i'm going to post a thread somewhere to get some info on FS2K...if it isnt drastically different than 98, then i'll get it. but if the game interface is much different i dont want to hassle with learning how to use the new program...the fact of the matter is that i'm happy with FS98...

if i'm guessing right, the company starting with a very big "B" is fortune 500...sounds like a fun job. i wish i had a simulator with a 180 degree view...
 

subhuman

Senior member
Aug 24, 2000
956
0
0
re: stepping.

i have had 4 of 5 retail 700E's hit 1000mhz with cB0 stepping (a few would do higher but 1000mhz bootup is a nice round number and better on the PCI bus). only one would "only" do 933mhz @ 1.8v.

i use 1.8v on all the chips. i'm not sure cC0 makes a huge difference... care to enlighten me with proof?
 
sale-70-410-exam    | Exam-200-125-pdf    | we-sale-70-410-exam    | hot-sale-70-410-exam    | Latest-exam-700-603-Dumps    | Dumps-98-363-exams-date    | Certs-200-125-date    | Dumps-300-075-exams-date    | hot-sale-book-C8010-726-book    | Hot-Sale-200-310-Exam    | Exam-Description-200-310-dumps?    | hot-sale-book-200-125-book    | Latest-Updated-300-209-Exam    | Dumps-210-260-exams-date    | Download-200-125-Exam-PDF    | Exam-Description-300-101-dumps    | Certs-300-101-date    | Hot-Sale-300-075-Exam    | Latest-exam-200-125-Dumps    | Exam-Description-200-125-dumps    | Latest-Updated-300-075-Exam    | hot-sale-book-210-260-book    | Dumps-200-901-exams-date    | Certs-200-901-date    | Latest-exam-1Z0-062-Dumps    | Hot-Sale-1Z0-062-Exam    | Certs-CSSLP-date    | 100%-Pass-70-383-Exams    | Latest-JN0-360-real-exam-questions    | 100%-Pass-4A0-100-Real-Exam-Questions    | Dumps-300-135-exams-date    | Passed-200-105-Tech-Exams    | Latest-Updated-200-310-Exam    | Download-300-070-Exam-PDF    | Hot-Sale-JN0-360-Exam    | 100%-Pass-JN0-360-Exams    | 100%-Pass-JN0-360-Real-Exam-Questions    | Dumps-JN0-360-exams-date    | Exam-Description-1Z0-876-dumps    | Latest-exam-1Z0-876-Dumps    | Dumps-HPE0-Y53-exams-date    | 2017-Latest-HPE0-Y53-Exam    | 100%-Pass-HPE0-Y53-Real-Exam-Questions    | Pass-4A0-100-Exam    | Latest-4A0-100-Questions    | Dumps-98-365-exams-date    | 2017-Latest-98-365-Exam    | 100%-Pass-VCS-254-Exams    | 2017-Latest-VCS-273-Exam    | Dumps-200-355-exams-date    | 2017-Latest-300-320-Exam    | Pass-300-101-Exam    | 100%-Pass-300-115-Exams    |
http://www.portvapes.co.uk/    | http://www.portvapes.co.uk/    |