Overclocking - Good Upgrade

m1ke

overclockers.co.uk do great bargains on chips. They gaurentee they're overclockable and set ye up with all the right equipment so you don't need to learn much about doing it. There's a celeron 566 chip that they have gaurenteed to run at 850 + motherboard and fan for £115. That's cheap now.
- Mike

Canaboid

No there isn't

Canaboid

I had a PII 350 running on an aopen bx6b board. I bought a CeleronII 600/slocket converter/big fan for £125 stg. I have now got it running stable and cool at a speed of 927mhz. I've benchmarked it and am very happy with the speed.
Any of you bx board users looking for a cheap upgrade should definitely consider this but be prepared to get your hands dirty and learn about overclocking.

_CreeD_

oops. Wrong thread.....

[This message has been edited by _CreeD_ (edited 01-08-2000).]

Gerry

A celeron 2 isnt as fast as a p3 though, not by a long shot. I got a p3 600 and am running it at 966 now, completely stable.

Chubby

Originally posted by Gerry:
A celeron 2 isnt as fast as a p3 though, not by a long shot. I got a p3 600 and am running it at 966 now, completely stable.

Yeah but you gotta ask yourself what do you need that extra speed for? You'll get the same speed in 3d games at resolutions like 1024x780 with a celeron2 850mhz, p3 600mhz, p3 1gz because the bottleneck is the graphic card. A p3 600mhz costs twice as much as a celeron2 566. Might as well go for the cheaper option now, and pick up a cheap overclocked 1gz p3 when they are the norm next year along with a faster graphics card that can keep up with the cpu.

Hmm, Gerry, completely stable p3 600@966? That's fsb of 161mhz. I don't believe you . Even at 866mhz with a fsb of 144 is pushing it. What mobo and other bits and pieces are you using?

[This message has been edited by Chubby (edited 01-08-2000).]

Kali

err you'll see a large increase from the celeron2 @ 850 to the 1Ghz even with a geforce 2 gts.

Chubby

Originally posted by Kali:
err you'll see a large increase from the celeron2 @ 850 to the 1Ghz even with a geforce 2 gts.

Yes but only in low resolutions like 640x480. I can get 53fps in Quake3 with a celeron 300@450 with a GeForce1 DDR in resolution 1024x780 with everything on. You'll get faster fps with a GTS and a faster cpu like p3 650mhz and a celeron2 850. People are not going to use low res when high res gives very playable fps. And if you look at the benchmarks in various websites, at res like 1024x780, the performance between all the different cpu is very similar because of the graphics card.

Gerry

ok chubby, just got a new power supply the other day, the old one was only 235w and was stopping it running completely stable. now running 1002 completely stable, thats 167.3 fsb. Quake3 runs about 300 fps on min resolution, about 200 fps average at 1024 * 768 with some detail turned off. If you dont believe me, I can post more details. With everything turned on, of course the bottleneck is going to be the graphics card. Quake3 is much easier to play with stuff like simple items turned off. 53 fps is not very playable, and fps makes a big difference to my aim. I am using an abit be6-2 motherboard with crucial pc133 ram. I don't need to pick up another chip next year, or the year after for that matter.

Jelvon

so pc133 ram is better then? , see I bought 128 mbs of it, it is faster or something?

Kali

PC133 SDRAM is generally manufactured to a higher quality than PC100 and will achieve a lot lower latency at higher FSB speeds.
theres a nice memory guide up at aceshardware.com if your interested in details.

sam

pc133 ram is just the same SDRAM , but it can run stable at a higher clock speed
same with pc66 sdram and pc100 sdram really..
if your 66mhz motherboard wont take pc100 ram then its your motherboards fault, not the ram

Chubby

Jesus Gerry, good going with the overclock. That's very good ram if it runs stable at 167.3mhz fsb.

And the Quake3 score, that's from running demo001 right? What did you turn off exactly and are you using a gts?

I have to disagree with you about the playable fps (yeah yeah, this had probably been discussed to death before on the quake board). I play a lot of fps online and 54fps to me and a lot of people is a very playable speed. Sacraficing details for speed you don't need in this day and age with the type of equipment you have is just silly.

Gerry

I turn off detail so that the game is easier to see, and so I can play better, not for more fps. Its a creative geforce 1 ddr graphics card. 54fps is very playable, but I play better with higher fps, and so would you.

Chubby

It sounds like you turned everything off like lightmap, textures, objects etc. It's sounds very very ugly like what people used to do with Quake1. If you truly play better with 200fps then it's probably a psychological thing

I get a much higher fps too if I just stare at a wall with everything on. Did you use demo001 as a benchmark? And can you post what settings you turned off exactly so I can see how fast a c2 850 is compared to your 1gz p3. Alternately, turn everything on (not just high quality) at 1024x768 and post your demo001. On a c2 850 with deforce ddr, am getting around 61fps.

Gerry

Ok I just ran the benchmark on both of the settings you mentioned. I switched to fastest in system settings, and 640*480, then in game options I set simpleitems on, and everything else off. This gives 239 fps.

On high quality at 1024*768 with everything turned on I get 68fps, showing the the graphics card is the bottleneck. However I wouldnt play with this much detail. I play at 1024* 768 with some just vertex turned off, everything else turned on. I used demo001, I dont have any of the 3rd party ones.