OT: Overclocked the AMD64 3400+

"3d" wrote in news: snipped-for-privacy@bright.net:

Mr. Me just posted results for a dual Xeon 3.4 a few days ago of just under

30 sec on the Ship in a Bottle benchmark. Run the benchmark and let us all know:

My Athlon64 3400+ also scored just under 30 sec with default settings.

Roughly speaking, multiply the Athlon 64 clockspeed by about 1.8 to get the equivelent P4

It' has to do with the number of instructions processed per clock cycle. The P4 does five, the Athlon 64's do nine. That should be about equal to a P4

4.2.

Some mother boards slow down the CPU when it gets to hot, so you may be pissin into the wind here.

Regards

Mark

well it was the auto program that set it. it runs it up to unstable crashes the restarts at last stable mark. i'm not one of those guys all crazy about sqeezing every last mhz out of a box. i just want stable and fast, but i will sacrafice fast for stable anyday. i was really just playing. somewhat safely i guess by using the utility. since i just dropped 600 bucks on the mobo/cpu/ps i am constantly watching the temps and just "making sure" im sure when the new wears off ill forget all about it till it bites me again!;0)

"3d" wrote in news: snipped-for-privacy@bright.net:

What I mean is, you can influence the test results by changing the display quality. You can also change the size of the SW window, etc. Recently, SIB performance numbers have been accompanied by information about the size of the window, etc. IIRC several people reduced their scores to less than 20 sec by changing these things.

I did OC my system early on, but I've been running stock speed. I'm using the MSI Neo FI2SR.

3d, just curious, what OCing utility did you use.

I've never tried to OC (chicken I guess).

Muggs

I didn't have much luck with overclocking the 64 bit system I have. I think it was mobo choice that prevented it. To date the only problem with it was a defective power supply which I replaced with an Antec True Power item. Even without OCing it moves right along. And I don't even have a fan on the CPU.

Also see my comment on the effect of MSoft hotfixes. People should do a benchmark every time XP self installs something.

The guy that works with me has a Dell with very similar hardware, but of course with a 3.2 GHz Intel inside. He is always grousing about speed.

I posted this last May:

kellnerp wrote:

Same system with NVidia FX3000

1024x768 32 bit Graphics quality low (SW setting fast) 18.6 sec for 50 iterations Graphics Quality High 25.6 sec for 50 iterations (SW setting slow)

And very little difference in 1280x1024.

So the FX3000 made up for the hotfixes and then some.

My system specs are AMD64 3.2Gig MSI k8T NEO FIS2R

1 gig Corsair ram MSI FX5900XT

Ship in a bottle benchmark is 1024x768 32 bit Graphics quality low (SW setting fast) 21.8 sec for 50 iterations Graphics Quality High 30.2 sec for 50 iterations (SW setting slow)

Not bad, considering my viedo card cost AUS$300

Stu