Quote:
Originally Posted by tonyl
p4p800se should have fsb control and memory control in bios.
Printable View
Quote:
Originally Posted by tonyl
p4p800se should have fsb control and memory control in bios.
Yeah, get it working, thanks!
All of the dothans are all pretty close together in clocking ability and pretty random (as in I've seen 730s do 2.9GHz and 750s which didn't make 2.5GHz).Quote:
Originally Posted by DFIorAsus
As for better than AMD? Well theoretically yes. Their processing power for such things is quite ahead. But AMD has alot more support.
Eg
No SLI for Pentium M
Hard to get PCI-e boards
Hard to get good ram for them cheap (for AMD, UTT is hell cheap but no good on Intel - you really need old skool bh5s, i guess that micron stuff in crucual ballistix is ok for intel).
whoa that was fast, glad to be of service :)Quote:
Originally Posted by DFIorAsus
I actually use a Pentium M for gaming because:
a.) I can't afford SLI
b.) I already have a 1337 AGP card
c.) I have a 1337 gig of bh5s
Hmm.. seem's like I forgot that thread.. :)Quote:
Originally Posted by TL1000S
Well.. my 350 was/is C0-stepping.. and I've bought/built a new Celeron M system.. and swapped my 350 with a 740 M (in the P4GPL-X system).
The Celeron M 350 is now installed in a P4P800-E Deluxe.. have not tried any more than 13x164=2.13 yet..
My Celeron M 360 is installed in a P4P800-VM.. and is as of speaking running 14x160=2240... both system at stock VCore (1.25).. The P4P800-VM has very little in Bios for OC'ing, so I'm using Clockgen from Windows (Startup folder).
These system are built as low-budget/good-performance.. both with softmodded 6800LE. I think Celeron M is "value for money".. :D
http://img420.imageshack.us/img420/4078/322664qb.png
Seriously tho.. who ever said Celeron's were slow :D
I have WR in highest clock and fastest superpi I believe
http://valid.x86-secret.com/show_oc?id=48040
Why isn't PAT enabled? Prob can get an extra second or so..
And does it benefit from extra vcore or is it a bus limitation?
I must say again that these Celeron M really surprises me.. positively.
OK.. no one (AFAIK) will do FSB200 (100% OC) but still they perform more than adequate.
My latest system.. still under testing.. manages 65% OC.. so far.
I won't be greedy though.. This is on default VCore.. in a P4P800-VM board.. accompanied with a 6800LE@16x5vp.
PAT's disabled because my ram couldnt do 2-2-2-5 @ 226 with PAT lol..Quote:
Originally Posted by wwwww
my Celeron M is on stock volts aswell, volts make it worse for me lol..
so 83.57% on stock volts isnt bad eh :cool:
tested out one cm 360J. booted up and did superpi1M @ 165 fsb and 1.3125v, didn't boot at all @ 166+ fsb speeds :confused:
i had a little vcca bump (as described by hipro) but it didn't obviously help.
also, extra voltage didn't help..
did a quick comparison between pm / cm @ 2240MHz:
Code:cm
3dmark 18820
cl 236.5
ch 95.1
dl 344.8
dh 176
ll 274.1
lh 120
nat 122.3
spi1M 38.265
spi8M 7min 53.250
pifast 54.52
pm
3dmark 20135
cl 257.8
ch 102
dl 339.9
dh 181.5
ll 324
lh 139.6
nat 122.8
spi1M 34.029
spi8M 7m 08.076
pifast 52.62
Well, good that you made those benches; so we now exactly know, that PM is only approx.10% better performer [@ double price!] on same speed/Fsb than CM /Best bang4buck/ ... :)
i could rerun pm with normal settings.. with HIGH fsb ;)Quote:
Originally Posted by Spajky
fixed multiplier and fsb wall are actually limiting factors :(
as for price.. this celeron cost me exactly 12x less than 780 :)
NOT ANYMORE ! :p: ... see this: http://www.xtremesystems.org/forums/...&postcount=388 ... :D :toast:Quote:
Originally Posted by caater
That feed VCCA with 3.3v line was insane :eek:
I'm holding a C0 Celeron M 350J and the FSB wall is 180 as well, wanting to find a peace way of breaking that barrier...
Hi all, I'm new to this forum.
Here are my celeron M results :p:
Attachment 43381Max clock, but not stable.
Attachment 43379
Attachment 43380
Btw, Spajky, very nice getting to boot a celeron M at 200MHz :clap:
Hi
I´m new here and searching for informations as I want bulding a Dothan system.
On the Intel datasheets I found the new Celeron versions as the 360J have different corevoltage. The specs say 1.004 - 1.292V now. Someone knows what corevoltage the CT-479 adapter will provide then now with this Celeron?
I will go for the P4P800 SE board. What bios version is the best or does it make no difference if it´s 1008 at least.
Thanks.
i posted that a long time ago, and I hadn't seen anything near as quick as 32.266 at the time..Quote:
Originally Posted by Willis
ofcourse now i don't
Actually, the Cpu heroically died after being suplied with 4,35V VCCA :cool: running higher than 200Fsb ...Quote:
Originally Posted by FunkyRider
IMHO with 1,26Vcore@boot but will OC better later since having lower default Vcore ...Quote:
Originally Posted by Flash53
Hello all.Quote:
Originally Posted by Flash53
I'm new here, too. Sorry for my English, I'm from Germany.
The Celeron-M 360J gets 1.294-1.314 V on my P4GPL-X. sSpec-No. SL8ML.
But I have the problem with fixed Vcore, too. Same as lawrywild. No way to adjust a higher voltage. Tested with 2 brandnew boards, both the same. So my C-M is a poor overclocker and at 150 MHz FSB it hits the wall. And without the chance to give it any more voltage this is very disappointing.
I tested the boards with a P4 Northwood and it gets 1.58-1.60 V instead of 1.5 V default. Quite a bit overvolting. With this CPU I can increase Vcore. But not decrease...
Very weird. Both boards show the same behavior.
Is it possible that ASUS assembled a series of faulty P4GPL-X? Maybe some components are out of tolerance.
Greetings,
Uschi.
yeh possibly that or I have come to the conclusion that the bios doesn't contain my cpu's microcodes, stupid ASUS idiots..Quote:
Originally Posted by Uschi M.
I may jus do vcore mod later this week..
I might also try putting in my celeron M 360 (non-J) and see what happens with that..
I just had a phone call with an ASUS employee a few minutes ago. He told me that's the problem with OEM CPUs. It's microcode/ID is not properly implemented in BIOS. Could be lucky my CPU is running at all.
And no one will write a new BIOS for some OC enthusiasts...:eek:
He advised me to buy a retail prozessor.
Default Vcore for C-M is 1.26V - Cpu microcode has nothing to do with Vcore, Vid pin combination and Vcore controller chip on MoBo does! Search for Vcore Vid pin trick mode ...
Hmmm have been experiencing some strange side effects of using a C-M on a P4GD1 motherboard. To start with the chip correctly instructs the board to supply 1.26volts to the chip, however, My board has a vcore mod, adjusting this in the usual manner at this voltage causes the vcore to do DOWN rather than UP, why is this? Next, THE P4GD1 DOES ALLOW YOU TO RAISE THE VCORE IN THE BIOS SUCCESSFULLY, BUT chosing a settting lower than 1.55volts reuslts in a undervolt reading at the core, above and it is the usual overvolt that the board "normally" supplies (for instance when a dothan or P4 is inserted). When vcore is abouve 1.55volts the vcore mod also starts behaving normally. Has anyone any idea why this would be? effectively it is of little odds, increased vcore has little effect on the overclocking potential of the C-M but I'm curious as to why this vcore issue arrises.
couldn't really find anything much on this, would you care to point me in the right direction?Quote:
Originally Posted by Spajky
thanks :)