[citation][nom]Zargoth112358[/nom]one other thing about software overclocks. you can oc just when you need it (playing crysis) and set it back to stock speed (or even lower) when doing something not cpu intensive. kinda like poor mans' speed step. thats how i oc my 2.6 ghz p4 northwood in my (very modded) compaq[/citation]
A decent motherboard allows you to save different bios setups... I have 4 different settings preprogrammed for just this scenario. I think i could have 8 if i needed.
I was once a fan of overclocking during the Pentium 3 age. I really loved to squeeze out more clock from my Coppermine and I was able to come up with a game-able system (Warcraft and Underground 2, at least) from a crawling one. When the newer systems came with outrageous power consumption, the Prescott specifically, I settled in to stock speed for the prize of efficiency.
I would want to try OC'ing my aging P4 640 this time using setFSB hoping that it won't exceed much from its 84-Watt TDP. Will the TDP rise if I increase FSB even if I don't increase the voltage? I believe this is the best time to ask you all overclocking enthusiasts..Thanks in advance!
why does everyone say bios is more stable than software apart from the fact that it is "true".
In my experience overclocking through software is never as fruitful as doing it through the BIOS, with respect to both stability and performance. The only thing I ever use overclocking software for is system monitoring.
Another thing I never use are those overclocking presets you find in some BIOSes.
How many of us ever test multiple boards to compare sw vs. bios
overclocking? Indeed, who buys lots of the same model of board
and then does the same tests to show what variation there is from
board to board? Nobody I reckon, in which case anyone saying in
an absolute way that one method is better than another is not
speaking from any solid statistical base. Opinions are formed
based on personal experience, and we remember our bad experiences
much more than our good ones.
I've read many reviews where a particular board was described as
not being that good for overclocking, but then read forum posts
where some people have obtained very decent results. Likewise, a
review praises a product but posts appear from people who bought
the item but had big problems. There's clearly great variation
between multiple units of the same product, never mind different
products. For example, when I bought two X1950Pro AGP cards in
late 2006 (stock core clock of 580), they came from the same
batch and I fitted both with the same better cooler (ACCELERO X2);
however, one card would oc easily to core/mem of 641/783, whereas
the other would only go to 621 with a barely changed RAM clock.
It's easy to say a particular method is best, but in almost
every case such comments are based far too much on limited
individual experience with a small range of boards, sometimes
even just one board. The comments posted here already show this
to be the case, ie. people claiming one or the other is better
while others give examples where each method has worked well for
them, or badly.
In the end, who cares? Try both, see what works best for you.
It's not as if the method one uses is any kind of fashion
statement; I get the impression there are some who feel that
sw overclocking is somehow not 'real' overclocking, that in
some way it's too easy. If anything, making it easier to do
is a good thing as this will broaden the base of those trying
to oc their systems, which will drive demand for parts that
can take it.
1) Every time I start the computer I get a blue screen error. The error is "The cryptographic subsystem failed a mandatory algorithm self-test during bootstrap. STOP: 0x000000123
2) Also when, I boot from CD (I.E. Acronis Disk Director or Vista Recovery Disk), the screen goes blank after 2 minutes.
A) I replaced the hard drive with my back up hard drive>> same error.
B) I replaced the video card with a new one >> same error.
C) I replaced the memory and placed in different slots >> same error.
D) I ran the windows memory diagnostic test for Vista and memtest86+ via USB drive>> Memory passed all tests.
E) I tried different voltage setting for cpu and memory>> same error
F) I flashed the BIOS to the latest >> same error.
G) I reset the BIOS to the optimal/ safest setting and removed cmos battery >> same error.
H) I never overclocked system.
I) I tried a combination of the above at different stages>> same error.
Please help! :-( The system has been working fine just until last week. No hardware changes were made before then.
System: Shuttle SP35P2 Pro
Crucial Ballistix 2GB (2 x 1GB) 240-Pin DDR2 SDRAM DDR2 800
Intel Core 2 Duo E4500 Allendale 2.2GHz 2M shared L2 Cache LGA 775 65W Dual-Core Processor
BFG Tech BFGR76256GTOCE GeForce 7600GT 256MB 128-bit GDDR3 PCI Express x16
Western Digital Caviar SE16 WD2500KS 250GB 7200 RPM
[citation][nom]moretolifekg[/nom]1) Every time I start the computer I get a blue screen error. The error is "The cryptographic subsystem failed a mandatory algorithm self-test during bootstrap. STOP: 0x000000123[/citation]
Now this is strange. You are one of the few people (including myself) that I've seen with this error. The difference is that I was overclocking to get it, and you weren't. We're also using different chipsets (P965 vs P35). It must be somehow related to Vista.
I do not understand why there are so many companies who think that creating a custom GUI with large splattered components is a better alternative to using Windows built in GUI API. I am not sure if CPU-Z uses their own GUI or Windows API, but it looks so much better than anything I have seen out of ASUS, MSI, and EVGA as far as OC tools.
Though BIOS overclocking is mostly effective, Phenom II Black Edition users can easily overclock their CPUs using Phenommsrtweaker. As it supports custom CnQ, you can use that to overclock the CPU only when needed so that the CPU automatically underclocks and undervolts when idle. Check out my blog to see how you can automate CPU overclock.
Strangely for me, the opposite was true. Windows would BSOD at 3.6GHz or higher on my E6600 even at 1.75V, yet it would be quite stable with much less voltage (although still alot more than most people would dare to try), Duplicate File Detective if I OCed in Windows. I have no explanation for it. Perhaps somebody can explain this BSOD:
"The Cryptographic Subsystem has failed a mandatory algorithm self-test in bootstrap." (Error code 0x000000123)
Its amaizing how far behind I am. I recently decided to dive into the world of overclocking, but most of the post and threads and discussions are from a few years back. But to add to the comments. I do prefer going through the Bios to overclock my older computer, so as I am learning if I jack anything up not a big loss. On my newer computer I dont need to speed it up yet.