|
Related Topics:
| Speedstep? - Just what happens if you o/c a computer with Will it still work/go tia, poly-p man
AMD Athlon 64 3200+ or Dual AMD Athlon XP 2800+ - First of all, sorry for What would you suggest between Athlon 64 3200+ and Dual Athlon XP 2800+? I mean, which will be more usable in real life (Video games, and other I'll buy it next week so any..
High-end configuration... - What would be your high-end CPU, MB, RAM, HDD, Graphic Card. Without Case, PSU, and such... I was thinking about this: AMD Athlon 64 3200+ ATI X800XT RAM, 1GB, DDR, PC-3500, 433 MHz, KINGMAX (is Kingmax best brand?) DUAL HDD MAXTOR 160..
Most processing power/Watt - Something I've been thinking about recently, of the CPUs in the 700Mhz and upwards range, which CPU, or family of CPUs gives the most for the least, I'm running a few machines for SETI and am on a budget. I have a bit of..
2x DDR 512MB PC4000 (500MHz) KINGMAX Hardcore - Here is the rest of my before question: Barton 2500+ OC'd @ 3200+ Memory from subject MB Asus A7N8X-X, 2x200 MHz FSB Radeon 9600 Pro 128MB So, I was wondering why do I get so low at Sandra Memory It's Int: 2970/93%, Buff:..
|
|
|
Next: Overclocking: Apogee Overclocking utility Version : 1.51
|
| Author |
Message |
External
Since: Nov 17, 2007
Posts: 43
|
(Msg. 1) Posted: Sun Jan 20, 2008 8:11 pm
Post subject: Use speedstep or not?
Archived from groups: alt>comp>hardware>overclocking (more info?)
|
|
|
|
|
| Back to top |
|
 | |
External
Since: Nov 17, 2007
Posts: 43
|
(Msg. 2) Posted: Sun Jan 20, 2008 9:13 pm
Post subject: Re: Use speedstep or not? [Login to view extended thread Info.]
Archived from groups: per prev. post (more info?)
|
|
|
On 21 Jan, 04:41, "Fishface" <inva....TakeThisOut@ddress.ok?> wrote:
> bornfree wrote:
> >I have a small overclock (300mhz) on my Intel Core 2 E6300 machine.
> > Should I use Gigabytes equivalent to speedstep?
>
> If it is stable at your chosen overclock, then sure, why not? It'll run cooler,
> use less power, and probably last longer.
Ok thanks Fishface.  I had to check! |
|
| Back to top |
|
| |
External
Since: Sep 29, 2003
Posts: 308
|
(Msg. 3) Posted: Mon Jan 21, 2008 1:09 am
Post subject: Re: Use speedstep or not? [Login to view extended thread Info.]
Archived from groups: per prev. post (more info?)
|
|
|
bornfree wrote:
>I have a small overclock (300mhz) on my Intel Core 2 E6300 machine.
> Should I use Gigabytes equivalent to speedstep?
If it is stable at your chosen overclock, then sure, why not? It'll run cooler,
use less power, and probably last longer. >> Stay informed about: Use speedstep or not? |
|
| Back to top |
|
| |
External
Since: Nov 17, 2007
Posts: 43
|
(Msg. 4) Posted: Wed Jan 23, 2008 12:59 am
Post subject: Re: Use speedstep or not? [Login to view extended thread Info.]
Archived from groups: per prev. post (more info?)
|
|
|
On 21 Jan, 04:41, "Fishface" <inva....RemoveThis@ddress.ok?> wrote:
> bornfree wrote:
> >I have a small overclock (300mhz) on my Intel Core 2 E6300 machine.
> > Should I use Gigabytes equivalent to speedstep?
>
> If it is stable at your chosen overclock, then sure, why not? It'll run cooler,
> use less power, and probably last longer.
If I double or triple my over clock, do you think the speedstep will
cause problems? >> Stay informed about: Use speedstep or not? |
|
| Back to top |
|
| |
External
Since: Nov 19, 2007
Posts: 170
|
(Msg. 5) Posted: Wed Jan 23, 2008 9:07 am
Post subject: Re: Use speedstep or not? [Login to view extended thread Info.]
Archived from groups: per prev. post (more info?)
|
|
|
Somewhere on teh intarweb "bornfree" typed:
> On 21 Jan, 04:41, "Fishface" <inva... RemoveThis @ddress.ok?> wrote:
>> bornfree wrote:
>>> I have a small overclock (300mhz) on my Intel Core 2 E6300 machine.
>>> Should I use Gigabytes equivalent to speedstep?
>>
>> If it is stable at your chosen overclock, then sure, why not? It'll
>> run cooler, use less power, and probably last longer.
>
> If I double or triple my over clock, do you think the speedstep will
> cause problems?
Why would it?
I have a rock-solid stable system, an E4500 that was supposed to run at 11 x
200(real)MHz for 2.2GHz CPU clock. I've restricted the multiplier to 8x,
raised the vcore a smidgen, set the FSB to 413 (seemed like a good number),
for a "1652MHz" [quad-pumped] FSB, which is running my DDR3/800 1:1at "826".
I have left speedstep, EIST, whatever you want to call it, enabled. When the
PC is idling the multiplier drops to 6x and gives me a CPU speed of just
under 2.5GHz. That's plenty powerful for running a system at idle don't you
think? When I need the power it switches to 8x faster than I can blink.
I could lock it at the 8x multiplier, disable SS/EIST (in fact I did for a
while) but I don't see the point. <shrug>
--
Shaun. >> Stay informed about: Use speedstep or not? |
|
| Back to top |
|
| |
|
FAQ
Search
Profile
Private Messages
Log in/Register/Password
