NOOB - Have i pushed OC'ing too far?!

Page 3 - Seeking answers? Join the Tom's Hardware community: where nearly two million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.
:lol: wow, thats why i preffer not to study hard during college days.. since this is out of the topic, here goes mine. i dont know anything about law of physics but hell yeah i know a lot about LAW ON CHICKS... theres a time in college where we choose our path and i am proud i choose the dark side (sith) rather than the padawans.. hehehehehehehehe.

ENDING: i am living happily with my 3 wife and childrens. with ofcourse some chicks with my spare time.. :lol:

Advice: Dont think twice when the Sith Calls.. hehehehe

ok for my overclocking experience i have an intel pentium 3.0HT, Intel Pentium 2.6, Intel Pentium 1.8, Intel Celeron 1.7 and ofcourse my beloved AMD's, a Amd 3200+venice 939 that i couldnt hit 2.6 that ussually people can do, an opteron 180 s939, X2 4400+, Sempron 2200+ and 2600+.. 😀 i have a lot of em. i think i still have some IBM series and those 378 on my house somewhere.. 😀 now can anyone help me overclock my A3200+? i dont mind if it fries but i preffer it Cooled.... 😀
 
Go on then, show us an example of a CPU (or any other chip) being killed by being too cold. Chips that have cracked due to a rapid transition between the two states (hot/cold) don't count.

You won't find one.
 
are you english or retarded? there is not a chip on the face of this earth that will be damaged from being too cold! WHY WOULD YOU WANT TO TRY TO GET THE CHIP COOLER IF COLD IS BAD?

can we have an IQ test before people start posting? isnt there some law against these people reproducing?
 
I did not say that it shjould be hot you moron i siad that it should not be too cold, there is a subtle difference between these two.

so a chip running at o lets say 30c will have more potential than a chip at -30c?

and intel makes good cpu's :roll:
 
I would just like to add that throwing a cooler on a cpu that is perfectly capable of freezing a mammoth is NOT good for it.

eh?

Negative bob. Typically the larger the purchased heatsink, the better it works. Better being defined by how well a device removes heat from the surface of a given cpu. Larger heatsink=XP90 or XP120 for example.

http://www.pcper.com/article.php?aid=139&type=expert&pid=5
http://babelfish.altavista.com/babe...php?action=show&id=14&seite=1&lp=de_en&intl=1
http://www.xbitlabs.com/articles/coolers/display/5-cool_24.html

The madshrimps site seems to be down at the moment, but they have a good one on hsf's as well, updated this summer.

Also...to the extreme cooling bias...
http://www.xbitlabs.com/articles/coolers/display/prometeia-mach2gt.html

There are less articles on extreme cooling but i can find them if u really want to waste my time. =) And i'm all about wasting time...especially while at work. I can come up with alot more personal examples rather then articles.

Edit: One more thing...We have derived science to explain reality, not the other way around. We(the people of the united sta...) can prove that higher (consistant) speeds (in mhz) can be accomplised through cooling at temperatures @ or below 0c then at temperatures =<40c. There are 100s of examples on various sites where people with extreme cooling, of one sort or another, have achieved speeds before unheard of, but only at very low temps.
 
Ok, for normal elements, as the themperature goes up the resistance DOES increase. HOWEVER, the previous poster still has some credibility and it is that semi-conductors such as silicon does behave in in the opposite fashon and decreases resistivity TO AN EXTENT as temperature goes up. Thats how they get silicon to conduct selectively conduct electricity in circuits. However, this discussion is of transistors in the CPU and such which is not made of silicon.

Also that image the previous posted shows doesnt prove his point. Each of those curves probably stand for some different element. And almost every curve shows resistance doing go up as temperature increases. There are some curves on that graph that kind of decreases but i suspect those are graphs of semi-conductors.
 
I know I'm a n00b by post count, so this post may not go over very well. However, with the constant bickering back and forth between resistance verses temperature, I figured I would throw in my 2¢ here.

I have successfully completed 3 years of Physics, and 2 years of Chemistry. Allow me to quote a specific paragraph in my textbook in relation to temperature vs resistance.

"The resistivity, and hence the resistance, of a conductor depends on a number of factors. One of the most important is the temperature of the metal. For most metals, resistivity increases with increasing temperature. [yes, it says most. however, thermistors increase inversely, but we are not discussing thermistors when we're talking about CPUs.] This correlation can be understood as follows. As the temperature of the material increases, its constituent atoms vibrate with increasingly greater amplitudes. Just as it is more difficult to weave one's way through a crowded room when the people are in motion than when they are standing still, so do the electrons find it more difficult to pass atoms vibrating with large amplitudes. The increased electron scattering with increasing temperature results in increased resistivity."

Take this equation (reading po and To as P-sub-zero and T-sub-zero):
p = po[1 + a(T - To)]

p = the resistivity at a certain temperature T.
po = the resistivty at some reference temperature To.
a = temperature coefficient of resistivity.

Here are some temperature coefficient values for some common materials, and their resistivity at 20 degrees Celcius:

Material, Temperature Coefficient, Resistivity
Silver, 3.8x10^-3, 1.59x10^-8 ohm*m
Copper, 3.9x10^-3, 1.7x10^-8 ohm*m
Lead, 3.9x10^-3, 22x10^-8 ohm*m

If you were to take, say copper, for example, you would get this equation:

p = 1.7x10^-8[1 + 3.9x10^-3(T - 20)]

If, for example, we wanted to compare the resistivity of copper at 0 degrees celcius verses 20 degrees celcius, we only need to input 0 for T, and solve for p.

p = 1.7x10^-8[1 + 3.9x10^-3(0 - 20)]
p = 1.5674x10^-8 ohm*m

As you can see, the resistivity of copper was much lower than when it was at 20 degrees celcius. (92.2% resistivity compared to 20 degrees celcius.)

As far as superconductors, they work in the exact same way as the previously mentioned materials. The only difference is that their resistivity only works when the metal is above a certain "critical temperature". Anything below the temperature and the superconductor had zero resistance.

And as far as thermistors are concerned, which work with resistance inversely proportional to temperature, they have a negative temperature coefficient, which is the reason that they seem to have a lower resistance as temperatures increase. However, thermistors are rare compared to the common material, which increases proportionally to the increasing temperature.

Processors are made of material with a positive temperature coeffiecient. Thusly, as temperatures increase, resistance increases. That is the reason that as people try overclocking their CPUs and temperatures increase, they have to begin upping their voltage to overcome the increased resistance. Similarly, as CPU's are cooled, resistance is lowered. Hence, the cooler you can keep your CPU, the less voltage you need to pump through it, and the better off your CPU is. You're not going to kill your CPU by having it -30 degrees celcius. That is, unless you lower the temperature from, say, 30 degrees celcius to -30 degrees celcius in a fraction of a second. If that happens, then you get into the subject of thermal expansion and contraction, which has absolutely nothing to do with resistance in the first place.

So, case in point, resistance increases with temperature, decreases with a decrease in temperature. Keeping your CPU at an extremely cool temperature is not going to hurt it. Electricity will flow through it better, and all will be good.

Like I said, this may be taken with a grain of salt, since I've only got one post. However, I have been lurking throughout this forum for a good while, and read this topic through all the way, and figured that it would be best to join and post what I know, to try to end this controversy.

Have a great day (or morning, since it's 5:00am and I haven't even gone to bed yet, and need to be up in 5 hours), and enjoy overclocking with greatly cooled CPUs!
 
You need to go into your bios and check your boot sequence. I would be willing to bet that your hard drive is not chosen in the sequence and that is why you are getting the error. This has happened to me and I don't know how it was changed in the first place but after changing it to boot from hard drive had no problems.
 
i also have a venice 3000+ oc to 235x9 on stock cooling and voltages. did you try the cmos reload switch(the small red button on the mb) wich helped me in similar situations