 |  |  |  |  |
Help a Newb w/AN7+AMD 2100+
| |||||||||
|
Help a Newb w/AN7+AMD 2100+
| | |||||||
 |
 |
| | Thread Tools |
12th June 2004, 17:48
| #1 |
|
Posts: n/a
| Help a Newb w/AN7+AMD 2100+ MOBO: Abit AN7 CPU: AMD XP 2100+ Hi I read the Marci's article on AMD Optimal BIOS settings + Overclocking Guide and need some help on a couple of items: I found that the Max Multiplier I can use is 15 ( when I use 16 the alarm goes off ). When I run Sandra CPU Bench, it shows the CPU is equivalent to a 2400+, but the BIOS reports the CPU as a 2000. The guide says to increase vcore voltage up one notch when you hit the max multiplier ( from 1.6 -> 1.65 ), but that still doesn't do it ( can't boot XP ). Should I keep using a higher vcore voltage until I can boot? I don't want to damage the CPU and will wait for help until i try. My CPU temp never goes about 44C. |
|
12th June 2004, 18:27
| #2 |
| Member  Join Date: May 2002 Location: wherever the doom is
Posts: 3,171
 |  15*133 is 2000 mhz, 2000 mhz is equivalent to a 2400+ processor (ratings doesn't equal clockspeed), use 1.75 volts in bios and then search for the sweet spot gradually(test stability with prime95 for one hour), finding your processor maxspeed is a time-consuming process
__________________ OC-2-the-death Where the Reverend is doing his Magick, all mortals be silent Doom over the world |
|
|
12th June 2004, 19:40
| #3 |
|
Posts: n/a
| Yes that did it. Can't get the Multiplier above 16.0 but that's ok because the CPU idle temp is around 43C and jumps to about 50C when i run Sandra CPU Benchmark. According to Sandra it performs like an XP 3000+. I'll be installing a better copperbase heatsink and fan soon, right now its a lame aluminum one. BTW thanks for explaining the AMD model numbers vs. the Actual CPU speed. That always confused me ( thinking a 2100 was running at 2.1 ) but I understand now how AMD comes up with the CPU model numbers..they are the P4 performance equivalent. i.e. AMD 2100+ ( @ 1.8Ghz ) performs like a P4 2.1Ghz |
|
12th June 2004, 20:01
| #4 |
|
Posts: n/a
| Small correction, they wan't to let the people think, that is performs like P4 2.1, but nowadays they are so wrong. A 3200+ more like a 2.8. Why don't u try to up the FSB, now that u know that it works @ 2128. Just lower the mult to 14 or so, and up the FSB and run Prime for 15 min (torture>blend). No errors ? up the FSB. Keep doing this till u get errors. Then drop the FSB by 2Mhz and run prime till u get errors and then keep dropping the FSB. When u found the max FSB up the multi so u will get somethin around 2128MHz. |
|
12th June 2004, 20:09
| #5 |
| Member Join Date: May 2002 Location: wherever the doom is
Posts: 3,171
| correction, the speed for the ratings is compared to a palomino, I think...
__________________ OC-2-the-death Where the Reverend is doing his Magick, all mortals be silent Doom over the world |
|
|
|
12th June 2004, 20:36
| #6 | |
|
Posts: n/a
| Quote:
well doesn't matter, the thing is: the ratings are not compared with the pentium serie but with some older model of AMD | |
|
12th June 2004, 20:41
| #7 |
|
Posts: n/a
| Yes..after my last posting I realized I was only trying to determine the Max speed the CPU could handle..I went back and continued instructions and upped FSB and dropped Multiplier. I got mine to 176FSB and 12 Mult. which is a bit lower than the max but want to install the better heatsink before I continue boosting. |
|
12th June 2004, 21:16
| #8 | |
| [M] Reviewer Join Date: Jun 2002
Posts: 5,003
| Quote:
__________________ . | |
|
|
|
12th June 2004, 21:30
| #9 |
|
Posts: n/a
| you're all idiots aren't you, sorry but this is unforgivable. The AMD PR rating was introduced to counter P4's fake MHz. The AMD just did more work on average each clockcycle compared to an equally clocked P4. This comparison worked perfect with 400FSB P4. It was still correct with 533MHz FSB P4's. But the latest 800FSB hyperthreaded are indeed a bit more then the stated AMD PR rating. Knowst thy history peeps. |
|
12th June 2004, 21:41
| #10 |
| Madshrimp  Join Date: May 2002 Location: 7090/Belgium
Posts: 79,021
 | ? Read up on the subject Freestyler before making statements like that. Piotke is correct. XP rating is compared to the Tbird series "officialy"; of course the rating was introduced to counter the Megahurtz run Intel was/is doing. same reason Intel is rating their latest CPU's also, to take away the spotlight on pure MHZ and rather on operating cycles per clock. know your facts before you start calling people idiots. or as you state "Put brain in gear BEFORE engaging mouth" 
__________________  |
|
|
|
| Thread Tools | |
| |
