Printable View
Ok you showed that FSB 400MHz 1066 Strap in better than 500MHz 1333 Strap.Quote:
Originally Posted by sierra_bound
Is it possible to make a 9x447MHz = 4030Mhz RAM 1:1 447MHz 4-4-3-8 on 1066 STRAp (boot from 400 and setfsb to reach 447)
It would be interesting to see if it's better to get high FSB or high memory freq for 32m
Yes, I think it is possible. I will try tonight. I have to go to work soon.
Everyone wants to run 500+ FSB, which of course is fun. But in many cases, you are better off running lower FSB and using the tighter strap.
Performance is not just about CPU speed. Latencies also play an important role.
Thank you
Just look few posts above ;) The Stilt has reached over 500MHz FSB, with 1.92vmch and NB cooled with icy water. Then, I can at this moment (on stock heatpipe cooler) run pifast @ 474MHz and SPi32M @ 468 with 1.76vmch. On top of that, I've already seen two other people get 46ish with stock mobo. Thing is, at this point you're pretty much limited to 1:1 ratio, as 4:5 ratio craps out as soon as you clockgen up to 410-420 area... From what I have tried so far, nothing helps to fix that :(Quote:
Originally Posted by jmax_oc
There is a difference between 534x8 (straight boot @ 534) and 474x9 (booted @ 400). In pifast, e.g. I can see 0.40s. As far as SuperPi 32M goes below post shows it all :)
http://www.xtremesystems.org/forums/...5&postcount=48
With this method, as sierra mentioned somewhere already, P5B Deluxe is as fast in Pi as any 975x mobo, including P5W64 WS Pro
I wanted to add one more thing before I head out the door. Obviously it's easier to run lower FSB with a CPU with higher multipliers like the E6700 or the X6800. 400X7 may not satisfy those who have an E6300. But you can always use Clockgen or SetFSB to go higher after entering Windows. I run 32M a lot and know what works best. The important thing to always remember is that the strap is set before entering Windows. People always wonder why the PSU shuts off temporarily. That's when the board is adjusting the strap.
Quote:
Originally Posted by bachus_anonym
even with 0609 bios?
I got some good 4:5 results with the 0609 that werent possible on the others, but i never messed with the strap... I get a new cpu probably on friday, so ill try it out then.
Yes, but it only applies to the case when you boot @ 400x9 and clockgen up from there, which appears to be the way to stay on a 1066 strap. Then again, I think you have to boot at default, x9 multiplier. Once you lower it to x8, the effect is as If you're booting at loose NB timimngs, again (that would agree with this suspicion that NBCC raises at lower multi, therefore loosening NB timmings, I guess). I can boot at 430x9 4:5 and it was stable, last time I tried, so that indicates you're already booting at some different NB timmings or a new strap.Quote:
Originally Posted by Revv23
Quote:
Originally Posted by bachus_anonym
Hmm well ill be getting an e6400 so ill be starting out at 8x and hopefully i will be able to hit 400. My ideal setup would be 450-475x8 in 4:5... but with a boot at 400 so as to have the 1066 strap. Higher NB volts (1.8+) helped me alot with 4:5 so maybe it just takes more to do 4:5 at 1066...
I hope hipro releases his AW9D mods soon i feel like there is more we can do with this mobo and we just dont know where to look.
to do 450 FSB and use 4:5 ratio means your memory is going to run at 562 mhz...can it do that?
EDIT:...are you going to boot into windows at 400 FSB and then raise your FSB to 450?
Cannot go higher on def multi because of crap air for now. Only 1:1 as mentioned, 4:5 hangs while set with clockgen.
9x400 CG to 423
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v6...M400-422CG.jpg
9x423 bios
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v6..._oc/32M423.jpg
What I'd like to know is why retail C2Ds get/can still hold tighter NB timings >500FSB. I have a B1 ES.
Boot at 495+CG to 501:
http://i10.photobucket.com/albums/a1...M_12m10453.png
Boot at 400+CD to 490:
http://i10.photobucket.com/albums/a1...2m_1139703.png
I can't quite get this strap to hold at 500FSB (even at 8x), but it would be somewhere in the 11m20s range if it did (from what I can tell of the iterations that finished). My real peeve is that retail procs seem to be able to keep tight chipset timings pretty much up to 550FSB even with a straight boot (Epox).
So does anyone know definitively if this an issue between ES vs. retail or am I missing something in plain sight? Any pointers sure would appreciated. My board does 580FSB and the proc does >5GHz on DI and it's embarrasing to barely be able to run times of retail procs with 200-300MHz less clocks when I go over 500FSB. Thoughts?
i can tell that i have a retail E6700 and i cannot get over 400 FSB at 9x (default is 10x) on a P5WDG2 WS pro...i am not a happy camper.
@boostedevo,
Man, I'm already impressed enough with The Stilt hitting 510MHz (clockgen'ing up from 400) and your 490Mhz, so don't complain man :lol: At this moment, all I can do 32M-stable is 470Mhz and that's already with 1.76vmch. Although, I'm still on a stock heatpipe, so that doesn't help at all...
As to ES vs Retail, I have no idea. But I have a feeling that even Retail chips won't hit stable 540-550MHz raised from 400x9. At least we now know, that 534x9 straight from BIOS can bring us, E6600 benchers, below 11m.
Your 502x9 on E6600 ES is kind of slow, though, even for straight boot... I have done 496x9 and it gets me 11:44.
Thanks for the reply B_A. You have messed with it so much, I was hoping you came across something ;) Yeah, my SPi's have been hideously slow forever. Best I ever had on that strap was 12:07 and I still don't know how I ran it...that 12:10 was as close as I could get again, LOL. It's certainly not for lack of CPU clocks or mem clocks/timings...they are about as high/tight as anyone out there.
9x400->490 is way fast for me compared to what I was getting. 9x493 got me a 11:32 today and I am working on 495 now. I think 32M @ 500FSB this way would take a miracle, but would be in the 11:2x area for sure. I just wish I knew why Epox and others can straight boot ~540FSB with fast NBs and anything over ~405FSB for me is so loose my SPi times are miles behind people with lower clocks. If you think of anything, I am all ears :)
I decided to run 447X9 1:1 @ 3-4-3 since my RAM can handle it.Quote:
Originally Posted by jmax_oc
Screen #1 - boot into Windows at 447X9
Screen #2 - boot into Windows at 400X9, then use SetFSB to raise FSB to around 447
http://img98.imageshack.us/img98/5390/32m447x9eg9.jpg
http://img98.imageshack.us/img98/883...9setfsbxx9.jpg
As you can see, almost a 30 second difference. The fastest combination was 402X10 4:5 because of higher memory speed. So high FSB does not always give the best results.
Thank you very much
Definitely agree with this and my recent buying decisions reflect it.Quote:
Originally Posted by sierra_bound
Here is an enhanced version of memtweak (binary work):
MchbarEdit.zip
but it's seem that it's difficult to find which register is imply...
Good luck. :)
ok just got a new CPU and an MCX159
My NB is idle at 22c lol, this thing rocks. Ill see how far i can get on 1066.
I try you program felix, it is way to hard for me to figure out, maybe i will take some screens of pre 400 and post 400 and i could figure something out.
Quote:
Originally Posted by FELIX
Felix,
Is it possible to add "small" feature on that cool memtweak that allow it to save the reading result to a file ? Probably to text file will be the best for us to hunt down the different ?
...it's possible and I add it in a next version,but you can also use cpu-z
to do that (cpu-z->last table->register.txt),the mchbar is include in the text.
hey! where can i get the latest version of Setfsb for P5b?
thanks!
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dax5
there : http://www13.plala.or.jp/setfsb/down..._P5Bdeluxe.zip
but Just type setfsb in google :rolleyes:
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pt1t
Thanks i was looking for this too.
Has anyone tried both SetFSB and ClockGen? Similar results? One better than the other?
It's possible now to save the reading in a text with this version:Quote:
Originally Posted by bing
MchbarEdit.zip
simply use mchbar.txt...
thanks pt1t!!
System (not mine): Asus P5B Del, E6600 6x525
If we take a look at this:
http://members.cox.net/kjboughton/NBCC.JPG
... should NBCC on the board be 9/6*525=787,5. Ans*4=3150MHz??? Is this possible?
NBCC is false rumor... the strap settings are very real, but multiplier has no effect on your overall NB speed IMO.
Multiplier has no effect, I had this confirmed and will be updating the guide. We look to have found another tweak though that allows upto 399 without the ram crapping out...more soon.
1333 is coming to a lot of boards now, latency tweaks also.
T
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tony
Looking forward to hearing more soon.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tony
meaning a new bios?
Nice work Toni and FCG. Thats an interesting read.
I didnt read everything, I need more time to do that.
I am wondering if everybody is using the P5B for the tests.
Theoretically it shouldnt be much different with other 965 boards, like the Biostar one, right? Or does Asus use different strap settings and/or internal timings?
by the way, does anyone have access to both bad axe and p5b deluxe?
would be very interesting to see a comparison, first p5b 399 boot vs 401 boot and then bad axe 1066 strap vs 1333 strap.
i don't remember if anybody has done such thorough comparisons with badaxe like bachus and others did with p5b.
i was wondering if p5b really uses 1333 strap, maybe it's even 1600 strap?
it could be possible that starting from 965 and 5000 chipsets there is support for higher straps like 1600. at least clockgens for xeons seem to have support for it.
Bad Axe is max 400fsb with 1067 strap ;)Quote:
Originally Posted by caater
So boot 400 then 1066 then 400 1333. I think this is what he meant.
Bad Axe both boot @ 400fsbQuote:
Originally Posted by Revv23
1333:
http://img166.imageshack.us/img166/7...rap1333zh0.jpg
1067:
http://img166.imageshack.us/img166/6...rap1067ux8.jpg
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tony
I'm confused now! My memory bandwidth craps out after 400, so what's the difference before 400? Never test 400 vs 300 before.
thanks yotomeczek.. can you run also 32M or at least 8M like loc.o did?
thanks again
Tried 2001. Though difference would be bigger. All 1:1, same clocks & settings. All air :D
Boot 9x434:
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v6...oc/boot434.jpg
http://service.futuremark.com/compare?2k1=9071465
Boot 9x400 clockgen 434:
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v6...ot400cg434.jpg
http://service.futuremark.com/compare?2k1=9071460
Compare:
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v636/loc_oc/comp.jpg
To keep up 8x450 clockgen 488:
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v636/loc_oc/8x488.jpg
http://service.futuremark.com/compare?2k1=9071448
Okay, so in summary, with P5B D, E6400 and HZ, my optimial settings would be
400x8
1:1
??
Great thread, a lot of information to take in though.
4:5 divider would be faster, especially with multiple CPU intensive apps.Quote:
Originally Posted by Vito
no actualy optimal would be 400x8 4:5 since HZ is capable of 500MHz. Thats what i run and it's almost equal to performance to 3.5g 1:1 bootQuote:
Originally Posted by Vito
also at 3.2g i only need 1.35vcore to be stable on air and at 3.5g i need 1.52vcore to be stable. So i figure running 4:5 and 3.2G is better in a long run for my cpu and temps down like 8c since lower Vcore is used. My Aquamark cpu score is actualy higher @ 3.2g ram 4:5 then 3.5g 1:1 ram.
Same here! 3.2 is faster. plus I'm stable at 3.5Ghz with 1.45v and 3.2ghz with 1.26v :up:Quote:
Originally Posted by railer
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tony
Any updates on this yet?
thanking you in advance!
Hmmm. Im confused now.
Im running a E6600 at a 7x multi.
I boot at 400x7 and Clockgen to 420x7.
Am I running the 1066 strap or the 1333 strap?
Tis all confusing me :(
You would be on the 1066 strap.
The strap is set before you enter Windows. When the board temporarily shuts down, it's setting the strap.
Honestly, I'm not so sure about it anymore :) Otherwise at 401MHz FSB system would shutdown after saving BIOS settings, which does NOT happen, at least in my case :shrug:, yet performance goes down the drain. But yeah, booting @ 400MHz helps retain better performance - whatever the cause might be...Quote:
Originally Posted by sierra_bound
The best performance on this board is 400FSB of less with 4:5 or 2:3 memory ratio. I think FSB is generally overrated. It's really memory speed that gives the biggest boost.
Unmodded 975X boards generally don't run 2:3 very well, so they can't really take advantage of RAM that can do DDR2-1150 or higher.
That's correct in general, yet not always. Perfect example is to compare 3-3-3 with 4-4-4 at FSB lower that 400MHz (e.g. 360 or 370) ;) It's a perfect example, that P5B Dx is weird, to not say a bit screwed up :lol:Quote:
Originally Posted by sierra_bound
What I was trying to say, is that with NB strap change memory ratios change (1066MHz FSB strap @ DDR2-800 is 2:3 and at 1333MHz is 5:6). But from experimenting, boot @ 400 and Clockgen to 450 vs straight boot @ 450, would result in different memory speed, yet it doesn't seem so, judging by level of stability. That's why I'm not so sure if 401Mhz results in a 1333FSB strap or rather only NB timings get loose.
Ah okay, I see what you're saying.
Maybe it's ClockGen and SetFSB that are screwed up.:) I generally try to avoid using either. Booting at around 390-395 with 2:3 ratio has given me the best results.
The other strange thing, which you may have noticed, is that SuperPi times get slower, the more times you run it. After each 32M run, I usually reboot. I found that I get better times that way.
Quote:
Originally Posted by sierra_bound
But you need to clockgen to keep performance up for higher fsb's...
It sure would be nice if asus would just let us control it.
Well, that only works up to a point. It's very hard to use ClockGen and go from 400 to 460 and beyond. Also it's a pain in the butt to do that every time you boot into Windows. There's only one tweak I will do after I get into Windows. Otherwise I run the bench as soon as possible. When I'm done, I reboot.Quote:
Originally Posted by Revv23
Again, I'm just talking about benching. People are becoming a little more savvy. Awhile back, everyone seemed obsessed with doing 500+ FSB. But many of them later realized that it wasn't necessarily faster than running 400+ with a memory ratio.
Ok, so what do I do now?
Setup as per sig.
Voltages are:
1.25V CPU
2.25V Mem
1.45V FSB Term
1.55V NB
1.6V SB
What should I try doing?
1. Just keep upping the FSB in clockgen until its unstable?
2. I also want to try lowering the chipset voltages, any suggestions with that?
3. I could probably get to 500mhz on the mem at 5-5-5-15 timings, 4:5, worth it? Any performance benefits over 4-4-4-12 420mhz?
Cheers guys :) I always feel I must have the tightest timings possible, Im used to AMD64 lol :)
Cheers :)
I would lower FSB Termination Voltage. You don't really need 1.45v. Try 1.4 or even 1.3. Also try setting NB and SB voltages to Auto.
Regarding timings, my guess is 4:5 with 500MHz memory speed and 5-5-5 timings would be faster. But you'll have to run some tests to confirm that.
My feeling is that if you have RAM that does DDR2-1000 or higher, then you should use that speed. Otherwise you've wasted your money. Again, that's just my opinion.:)
This guide is great. Posted at BleedinEdge as well.
This may seem really nooby, but does RAM multiplier have any effect on this? or is the 4:5 on the P5B DH just crap?
What i`ve managed:
440x7 (4:5) 550
440x8 (4:5) 550
445x8 (4:5) 556
445x7=NO, 450x8=NO The NBCC for these would have been 572 and 508 resp, though Tony said that is irrelevant now?
2:3 works better, though I have to choose RAM performance OR CPU performance here... my CPU and RAM options mean I cant get the best of both at the moment.
The other thing i`m finding is that 395->402 FSB is a no-go for me. I tried 390 and clockgen past 400...BSOD. If I throw more volts at it...will that solve it?
Kenny
Anyone checked to see that the booting at different speeds is not also affecting CAS latency?Quote:
Originally Posted by bachus_anonym
Say set at 3-3-3-x at 400, but boot at 401 and you get 4-3-3-x? Setting CAS4 is faster at some FSB's than others too, right? So maybe CAS latency also effects what strap you get at certain FSB's?
The 4:5 ratio has never been great on this board. It wasn't until bios 0609 that it became acceptable.Quote:
Originally Posted by K404
395-402 is a no-go with 2:3 or just no-go period? At 2:3, that would put your RAM speed above 590.
Hi
what fsb can you usually reach, when boot up from windows at 400mhz and than overclock with clockgen or setfsb! mine finished at 475mhz. At 480mhz win freeze.
sliM
Not that we can tell, no, but I don't think this is happening. Besides, performance-wise CAS3 vs CAS4 itself does not seem to make a big of a difference, except for a higher voltage requirement for CAS3. Loosening TRCD to 4 gives you a bit bigger penalty, though.Quote:
Originally Posted by STEvil
I've been playing a bit here and I don't think in case I described few posts up (3-3-3 vs 4-4-4 @ below 400MHz FSB) CAS3 is the problem but it appears that it's TRCD=3. Once you go 3-3-3, performance is worse than 4-4-4. But boot with TRCD=4 (or even change it in Windows, interestingly enough) and you're back on track. But above 400MHz, things get different again :)Quote:
Setting CAS4 is faster at some FSB's than others too, right?
BIOS on P5B Dx is really weird :(
Hey Sierra. I just tried more voltage on the MCH and its not a problem now. 390x9 in BIOS, and clockgen to 410. (4:5) All good ;) Sorry bout that.Quote:
Originally Posted by sierra_bound
K
Well I did some testing today.
399x7 and 400x7, 1:1, 4-4-4-12 gave the same results so I can say thats the 1066 strap.
At 401 there was a big change in B/W and CPU scores.
I tried the 4:5 divider at 400FSB, 5-5-5-15, benchmarks were better but simply could not get it stable :(
So back to 4-4-4-12 @ 400 and clockgening up as far as I can go with 4-4-4-12/5-4-4-13.
:)
I go see Asus tomorrow, im going to plead with them to open up the bios for us, you need to know that they have to reverse engineer a lot of the settings so its a time consuming process.
MCH latency is the key here, relaxing it allows the board to clock real high but as you see there is a loss in performance...there will always have to be a balance so performance rises linear.
Why not ask them to allow us to set the strap?Quote:
Originally Posted by Tony
Shoudn't that be easier to do, the BIOS does it automatically anyway atm?
As for my clocks, testing at 430x7, 1.25V CPU, 1.15V mem, 4-4-4-12 timings, 1.4V FSB Term :D
CR.
can anyone test this please because i dont reach 500fsb when i boot from bios. I would like to know wether maybe my E6300 couldnt handle the high fsb or my board steps out. But i guess its my cpuQuote:
Originally Posted by $liM
Quote:
Originally Posted by $liM
try it with 6X coef.
already done, no change:(Quote:
Originally Posted by Pt1t
Its not just about the strap. There are a lot of internal timings, we have no clue about yet. Messing with them around could yield in a minor oc, but superior performance.Quote:
Originally Posted by Concorde Rules
If you`re clocking past 400 using Clockgen, with a 4:5 divider, thats more work for the chipset. Try upping the volts, if should work. 4:5 is fine up to 440-445 for me.Quote:
Originally Posted by Concorde Rules
:)
@Tony... look forward to reading about the outcomes from the meeting :toast:
Finally I found 4 registers wich change invariably in same values
between "under fsb400" and "over fsb400" on 965 chipsets:
(in 32bits values)
under 400:
offset 030->000F5A06
offset 034->01002810
offset 03C->23034417
offset 1F0->00008000
over 400:
offset 030->00025A00
offset 034->36802800
offset 03C->842B4407
offset 1F0->00009000
You can check this with it (final version):
MchbarEdit.zip
I've been reading this thread trying to figure out where the issue is with my setup...I cannot get anything Orthos stable past 467 now, unless I got 1.375 in Vcore and that takes me stable up to 3.304ghz...from there up, nothing is orthos stable! :(
I booted up at both 399 and 401fsb, then clockgen'd to 480+ fsb, and still nothing. SuperPi seemed ok up to 3.4, but anything above 466fsb in orthos is not stable.
the funny thing is, at 466 i'm 24/7 stable....perfect. But at 467 and above, Orthos starts to give me problems....I believe it has something to do with when the straps change:
What else can I try? should I drop to 4:5 and 400 fsb and see? But that would deteriorate my performance in terms of CPU speed and also 3dMarks, no?
any help/guidance is appreciated.
i can run AQ3 and 3D2001 when the machine is not orthos stable...
you can't argue with stable platforms even though Orthos says the opposite.
Jeez I should neaten that graph up a little ...LOL
I thought I would link you to some of my ramblings, have a look at my blog post here we really are up against it here untill we get bios files that allow us to tweak and the the boards do what we want and not what the bios engineer wants.
impressive post tony...Quote:
Originally Posted by Tony
But I dont think intel will release this info, and it's just waiting for the Rd600
thanks Tony...good post.Quote:
Originally Posted by Tony
unfortunately, it doesn't help me at this juncture...I'm stuck at 466 and would really like to reach 480 stable, even if just for the thoery of it all, to learn where the bottleneck is :(
very nice read, Tony...but aren't you talking about releasing intellectual property that a chipset vendor might want to keep very closely to the vest, for what ever reason?!
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tony
tony, thanks for trying!
If you succeed you would really help out the community here at XS. As you always do.
He's used to it from way back... :clap:
I gave up with the 4:5 divider, couldn't get it memstable even at 5-5-5-15-5-35 timings :(Quote:
Originally Posted by K404
1.55V NB and 16V SB, 1.4 and 1.45V FSB Term tried.
Im sitting at 433x7, 3030mhz, 1.25V CPU, 2.15V mem @ 4-4-4-12-4 timings. 1.4V FSB Term, 1.55V NB and 1.6V SB, will try lowering them after 48 hours of folding at home.
As for the meeting, Tony, give em hell :toast:
There are settings that would not harm the vendors IP IMO, things like drive strength etc which would help with overclocking. If you have a look in the latest bios files for the DFI975 there are a few more options available than most so there is scope for improvement.Quote:
Originally Posted by Ace-a-Rue
I am not asking for every last tweak, only the ones that matter...and for every performance board to have them, that way we would have a level playing field with the AMD boys and be able to push DDR2 to new highs.
As I said in the blog, I doubt we will get what we need.
T
well...i wish you the best in your endeavor...go get-em "Tony the Tiger!":)
OK, I'm a little confused now :confused: Actually I had some results that confirm the multiplier dependence. Or is this with a new bios ?Quote:
Originally Posted by Tony
My post over at BE yesterday :
Quote:
Originally Posted by thorgal
I spoke to powers that would know and they assured me cpu multi should have no effect, if we see an effect it is something coded into bios causing it by the motherboard manufacturer. You should see a multi change, force the FSB you want and if the CPU will do it you get a boot, simple as that.
Well I visited Asus, I spoke to the product manager over the P5B and he said he would see what they could do... we have to remember Asus already have a plan in place so it all depends what they can tweak etc.
I asked for as many dram timing options as they could release, manual control of the 1333 strap and some options for MCH latency.
I said pretty please so you never know ;)
T
Tony in tiawan!!
Go man Go, we love you. :)
What happens on your screenshot is, that it appears (I think) you have booted to Windows @ 380x9 and then lowered to 373MHz FSB using ClockGen. Due to ability to change a multiplier on C2D, a lot of monitoring software gets confused and report CPU speed as if you have booted at default multiplier - hence 3800MHz. ITAT doesn't get fooled, but e.g. ORTHOS does, so is Windows System Properties, when you look at it and few other tools, including CoreTemp ;) Also, all 3DMarks report CPU speed in the same way, in other words, they all recognize it incorrectly when multiplier is different from default...Quote:
Originally Posted by thorgal
BTW, you should update your CPU-Z to 1.37... Just to have the latest version ;)
For the record I have spoken to Abit, Asus, Gigabyte and foxconn all regarding 965 overclocking...begging for DRAM and MCH latency options as well as manual control of 1333. I spoke to DFI about the Infinity 975 and they promised a new bios soon with some added tweaks. I did not get to talk to the P5W guy over at Asus but im sure the P5B guy will talk to him :p:
I meet Abit again today for dinner and will talk 965 and 975 again, They have made good progress but the 965 is still a little ways behind the P5B and DQ6.
We all need to remember they are more used to listening to reviewers than DRam engineers, especially ones who are mad on ram overclocking ;) so this will be a learning process for them also. At the moment most motherboard reviews are a little mundane so they are looking for a way to freshen up their product...i think a surge of new improved bios files is a good way of doing this.
Seeing is beleiving though, we will know in a week or so I would hope.
Thanks Tony,
*crosses fingers* I really hope you're successful in getting the manufacturers to implement some new options in the BIOS's :bows:
cool, thanks for the BIOS Pt1t, the latest i had was the 0801Quote:
Originally Posted by Pt1t
Thanks for your answer Bachus :)Quote:
Originally Posted by bachus_anonym
Actually I did boot into windows at 380Mhz as you said, but the Dominator was not orthos stable at that point. The monitoring soft (orthos and coretemp) did not recognize the changes set with clockgen after the boot-up, and remained at 3.8Ghz. Oh yes, and you'll see in the screenshot that I do have cpu-z1.37 installed, but it doesn't work in conjunction with clockgen in my case.
Still remaining is the issue why clockgen is reporting a speed of 422x9, shouldn't it be 370x10 then (default multi). That's why I was thinking about the multiplier/chipset issue this tread started with. And finally : if it's not the multiplier, it has to be a bios thing as Tony pointed out, because my rig sure as hell doesn't run 440x9, whereas 440x10 is not a problem.
Thanks again :)
""Tony AKA BigToe""Quote:
Originally Posted by Tony
you worked hard for this monicker,
i'm sure it is frustrating as s%^&, but facilitating and communicating is not easy,
"Like the Bridge Over the River Kwai"
keep the faith!
that is GREAT!...we really appreciate that you are keeping us abreast of the latest developments.
you know it is funny how we, the user, usually think of the motherboard manufacturers as robots; just doing their job in an automated fashion...it is VERY refreshing to hear that they are listening and they will at least give it a try to update the product lines through additional bios tweaks.
i have a traditional Navy term for you that signifies a job well done: "ATTA-BOY!"
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tony
Tony, are you saying, those mobo makers are racing to exploit the "undocumented" feature of 965 NB ? I would say it sounds like a "secret recipe" to me ? :D
I'm sure u did... :DQuote:
Originally Posted by Tony
Quote:
Originally Posted by sierra_bound
running 4:5 ddr2-8000 5-5-5-15 e6600 400x9 1.4v p5b dlx
may need to up vcore a titch, or, drop fsb = prefer 24/7 use
4:5 much better than 1:1 with higher fsb
wonder if lower fsb and 2:3 divider might be better?
Well I begged for better bios options on most boards, i will follow up with the engineers and we will see what they can add in for us to test and tweak.
Most have fully featured bios files on the new 680 boards that are just about to ship,which most are pushing as their main enthusiast product...so we will see.
YES!...many thanks, Tony!
Thanks for your efforts Tony & everyone trying to figure out wth is going on with the p5b, I used the techrep guide & the info here while setting up mine - its folding at 440 fsb today just as an initial test run; and thanks also Tony for a very old thread on abx iirc about p4m OC'ing which helped me set up my 1.6 @ 2.55 not so long ago.
I used the asus update software yesterday for the first time, I've always thought of it as a bit risky - worked very nicely :)
"..new 680 boards..." :confused:Quote:
Originally Posted by Tony
Quote:
Originally Posted by jVIDIA
My P5B is outdated already :(
sort of!:DQuote:
Originally Posted by Vito