interesting i haven't tried that particular timing yet
Printable View
interesting i haven't tried that particular timing yet
It's one of the more important ones...tRRD sorta helps, tRFC we all know about. The rest are basically for show IMHO.
13.xx Category....
Gautam, my clock speed lower 0.6mhz than yours :D, this was with 2/3 divider :D
http://img265.imageshack.us/img265/9...ategorytl9.jpg
yeah TRRD is good for a few seconds for sure :toast:Quote:
Originally Posted by Gautam
Wow! I didn't see that one coming. I didn't really even try the 2/3. Looks great. :up:Quote:
Originally Posted by andre X_X
16.xx Category
im closer to you gautam... :D
i got 17m 0.172s on 2.659mhz, but still trying to catch 16x...
http://img217.imageshack.us/img217/1...ategoryxl3.jpg
:DQuote:
Originally Posted by Gautam
btw, nice 10min time:toast:
12.XXX category
http://img516.imageshack.us/img516/8...n58312szb7.jpg
14xx Category :toast:
I got you now Gautam, my clock were 0.1mhz lower than yours :D Countless effort on trying to get sub 15m on this clocks....
http://img299.imageshack.us/img299/4...ategorydm7.jpg
update on 16.XX Category.... :toast:
Three in a row Gautam :D
http://img472.imageshack.us/img472/7...ategoryhf7.jpg
Andre your results seem to be the product of CPU-Z fluctuation's rather than actual efficiency.
For example in the 16.XX category Gautam would not normally beat your time by .45 of a second by simply increasing his 'clocks' by .3 mhz.
The point of this thread is to measure efficiency not to take advantage of the CPU-Z clock variances.
;)
^^ :nono: We're having fun here. The point of the thread is to get under the minute with the lowest clock speed. .1mhz less is lower.
Heh, indeed we are. :p: I happened to get 3 in a row tonight as well. ;)
13.xx..good thinking on the 2:3 andre, wasn't expecting it to be this fast. :p:
14.xx
16.xx
He Gautam,
Those are some serious nice times you have there, but offcourse I want to challenge you. Here is mine best score for the 13,xx catagory.
I want to challenge you on more catagories, but there's one problem, my system has crashed recently and up till now I'am not able to find the setting I had.
Forgotten to wright them down :brick: :mad:
System :
Asus Commando
Core 2 Duo E6600 @ 3320 Mhz (8 x 415 Mhz, 1,53 Volt bios)
2x1GB Crucial Ballistix PC8000 @ 622,5Mhz 4-4-4-4-5 (2,575 Volt bios)
Everything is air cooled (cold air)
Whoa, your ram is just amazing...dunno if I can keep with that. :eek:
Okay, here's to both of us staying on our toes. :p:
Gautam, how you do that dude... its awsome....do you have new tweaks? i mean, you were at higher clocks on 13xx with 3:5, share us the tweaks plesee :D:D.... Great job... you too oldscareface... your memory is sick :D, your tweaks also... great job dude... dont forget to write down your tweaks also, and share with us so that we can remember it for you :D
Heh you're doing quite well andre...your times on 2:3 etc differ practically within the margin of error with mine. Last time on 3:5 note my timings were a lot slacker. :p: I was thinking of going for 2:3 on the 8x like Oldscarface did here but I was pleasantly surprised by the way 3:5 was doing on 9x.
Hey Gautam,
Too slow to challenge you but 12'5x"@3.6 is not so bad.
http://img502.imageshack.us/img502/5...8938bi4.th.jpg
Maybe i need to try with W2K3.
Looks good. :cool: That's a very strong time for XP.
12xx Category
This is my best effort.... too bad my ram cant run 4-4-4, need loosened to 4-5-4... this is with 2.6v and the result wasnt bad at all, it just 0.01s to 13s :p:
might need 2.7v for 4-4-4 maybe.
Is that the Team Xtreem 5300? I could get that 32M stable at 4-4-4-8, ~2.65v actual, more seemed to hurt. Tried looser tRAS?
Anyways thats very fast for 4-5-4. :toast: Far ahead of most at 4-4-4-x.
Very nice times lately.
Welcome koda.