Overclocking 939 FX-55

icingdeath88

Member
Feb 9, 2008
43
0
0
Hello all, I'm trying to get the absolute max overclock out of the fx-55 that i'm still running as my main comp. as you all know i'm sure the fx's are like black editions or extreme editions in that they have unlocked multipliers for "easy" overclocking. Also, just so we're clear, this is a san diego core (90nm). Yes, it's also single core. Cooling is not a problem, as I have a ridiculously overperforming cooler for this proc.

So far:
was 100% stable at 1.55 Vcore, 14.5 multiplier, and 200mhz fsb for several months.
This was on my asus a8n-e (nforce 4 ultra).

switched motherboards to one that was in another of my comps, since the 1.55 volts was the max that motherboard could be set to. The "new" motherboard is a foxconn nf4uk8aa. This one goes all the way to 1.800V for the processor and allows adjustments for the voltage of the nb and htt, which i thought was nice. I lose half-multipliers however.

So now I'm doing a 14x multiplier and adjusting the fsb to see the most i can get out of it. 15x200 = 3ghz was unstable (as determined by intelburntest) at any voltage up to 1.800, but temps were what i consider fine. (54 C during intel burn test)

So i've tried 14x213 = 2.982ghz at voltages 1.650 to 1.800, not stable.

Tried 14x212 = 2.968, at a wide range of voltages, still not 100% stable up to 1.700, and i'm getting annoyed because i feel like this should be enough voltage for stability, seeing as how this is only 68mhz above 2.9ghz which was stable at 1.55Vcore.

Is there something i'm missing or are there any suggestions you guys have?

Also, is the concern with overvolting just temperature, because 50 C is the max it will reach prime 95 blending, which seems like an ok temp to me. any other effects of overvolting this much?

I'm not concerned with the life of the processor, since it's kinda old and 1-2 years faster will make me happier than 5 years a little slower. At this point, it's mostly for sh*ts and giggles.

Any other advice you guys have for me would be greatly appreciated.
Keep in mind, my hardware is from days before there were a lot of options available for overclocking like there is on these awesome new intel systems.
 

error8

Diamond Member
Nov 28, 2007
3,204
0
76
Originally posted by: icingdeath88


Is there something i'm missing or are there any suggestions you guys have?

Uhm... intelbrurntest is only for intel cpus. I'm surprised that it works on your cpu, but I get the feeling that it's not functioning properly on your system. Use OCCT or Prime95 for stability testing.
 

icingdeath88

Member
Feb 9, 2008
43
0
0
The release notes of intelburntest say that it's good for amd cpus. and under the previous overclock of 14.5x200, it showed as stable.
 

cusideabelincoln

Diamond Member
Aug 3, 2008
3,274
41
91
When you raise the "FSB", make sure your RAM isn't being overclocked. It will cause you to fail stress tests if it is. Increase the voltage or relax the timings to compensate.

Otherwise, you might need to increase the voltage to the northbridge as well.
 

mrSHEiK124

Lifer
Mar 6, 2004
11,488
2
0
icingdeath, post the pictures of your HDT-S1283 mounting setup damnit. DIY stuff is cool.
 

myocardia

Diamond Member
Jun 21, 2003
9,291
30
91
Killing your processor by overvolting it, only to get another 50 or 75 Mhz overclock, is doing you no good. You won't even be able to tell the difference between 2.9 Ghz and 2.968 Ghz. Besides, it seems 2.90 Ghz is about all your FX-55 is good for. There were quite a few of them that wouldn't even do 2.9 Ghz. I'd recommend you just run 14x207, @ 1.55v.
 

Zap

Elite Member
Oct 13, 1999
22,377
2
81
Originally posted by: icingdeath88
Is there something i'm missing or are there any suggestions you guys have?

You're missing the fact that you've hit the limits of your particular CPU. BITD I obtained a bunch of San Diego core chips (several each of FX-55, A64 4000+, A64 3700+) and most of them topped out around 2.7-2.9GHz. I had a rare 4000+ chip that could do 3.2GHz with huge VCORE (maybe 1.75v? I forget). In any case, seems as if these chips will just hit a wall and need huge voltage for a couple more MHz - sure sign that it won't do any more.
 

icingdeath88

Member
Feb 9, 2008
43
0
0
Ok thanks guys. I'm leaving it at 14x210, 1.7V. i know it's not really faster than 2.9 in real life, but it'll suffice to make me feel like i've not wasted my time switching motherboards and all that.

Interestingly, i corrupted the hell out of my windows installation in ways i never realized were possible (I don't care because i'm installing windows server 2008 now anyway and i had already backed up everything). itunes and firefox both got corrupted, as well as some random windows files. seems to still be working, i just had no idea that it could be that bad.
 

mrSHEiK124

Lifer
Mar 6, 2004
11,488
2
0
Originally posted by: icingdeath88
Ok thanks guys. I'm leaving it at 14x210, 1.7V. i know it's not really faster than 2.9 in real life, but it'll suffice to make me feel like i've not wasted my time switching motherboards and all that.

Interestingly, i corrupted the hell out of my windows installation in ways i never realized were possible (I don't care because i'm installing windows server 2008 now anyway and i had already backed up everything). itunes and firefox both got corrupted, as well as some random windows files. seems to still be working, i just had no idea that it could be that bad.

Lack of stability will usually nerf a Windows installation. Once I/O operations start getting wonky, you know you've hit a wall.

Again, I will repeat that there it's really not worth it to run at 210 * 14 1.7V when 207 * 14 runs perfectly stable at 1.55V. Going from 3.4 GHz to 3.596 GHz on my Xeon was only worth the increase in temperature and the time wasted in getting all the voltages right because my Vcore went up less than 0.1V, from 1.21875V to 1.28750V, and well within safe ranges for these things.

1.7V, regardless of whether or not it will kill it instantly, is a lot for a chip with a stock Vcore of 1.35V-1.40V. Adding an extra 0.15V for 42 MHz is even more ridiculous; I see you every other day on campus, I'll give you $20 if you can show me ONE real world application that can even see a whole second increase in performance with those 42 MHz. No, unRARing a 10 GB file or encoding a 5 hour video don't count. I just spent 15 minutes digging around AMDs website and while their white papers don't list a maximum safe voltage for chips like Intel's do. Still, 1.7 is excessive.
 

mrSHEiK124

Lifer
Mar 6, 2004
11,488
2
0
Originally posted by: icingdeath88
It's actually closer to 1.65 after vdroop.

Yeah but what's 1.55V after Vdroop? Slippery slope with stability and hardware lifetime there.
 
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/    |