XP2200+ FSB question

[Guest]

Archived from groups: alt.comp.hardware.overclocking.amd (More info?)

I've got a system I built around a an Athlon XP 2200+ (Tbred A) and a
A7N8X Deluxe (r1.04) and PC2700 RAM. The 2200 is running at the
default 133MHz FSB setting - I bought the faster RAM to handle a
future CPU upgrade to the 166 bus speed. Nowadays I'm inclined to
wait and build a new Athlon64 box for my next system (maybe late this
year, probably early next). In the meantime I'm looking to extend the
performance of this system.

My Tbred A has always run on the hot side, so I'm not interested in
overclocking it. However, raising the FSB to 166 and dropping the CPU
multiplier seems like a reasonable thing to do. My CPU has the
following markings:

AIUGA0237GPIW

If I've done my research correctly, that means it was manufactured in
the 37th week of 2002, and that means the multiplier isn't locked,
right? If that's the case it should just be a matter of making the
changes in the BIOS. I'm thinking of dropping the multiplier to 10.5
which would actually underclock the CPU a bit.

Is my thinking correct on this? What are the consequences if it does
not work - will I still be able to get back into the BIOS and revert
the settings? Is it worth doing performance-wise?

Jack
Remove your coat for email.

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: alt.comp.hardware.overclocking.amd (More info?)

On Fri, 28 Jan 2005 20:54:52 +0000, AlphaWoolf wrote:

> AIUGA0237GPIW
>
> If I've done my research correctly, that means it was manufactured in the
> 37th week of 2002, and that means the multiplier isn't locked, right? If
> that's the case it should just be a matter of making the changes in the
> BIOS. I'm thinking of dropping the multiplier to 10.5 which would
> actually underclock the CPU a bit.
>
Go with 11x166 (1833MHz) if you do anything. Raising FSB and dropping
clockspeed counters each other.

> Is my thinking correct on this? What are the consequences if it does
> not work - will I still be able to get back into the BIOS and revert the
> settings? Is it worth doing performance-wise?
>
Going with 11x166 will probably get you about 5% increase in performance.
Is it worth it, I don't know, but it's free.🙂 Shouldn't be a problem,
but if it is, clearing cmos should fix it.

--
Abit KT7-Raid (KT133) Tbred B core CPU @2400MHz (24x100FSB)
http://wesnewell.no-ip.com/cpu.htm

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: alt.comp.hardware.overclocking.amd (More info?)

"Wes Newell" <w.newell@TAKEOUTverizon.net> wrote in message
news😛an.2005.01.29.05.00.56.69974@TAKEOUTverizon.net...
> On Fri, 28 Jan 2005 20:54:52 +0000, AlphaWoolf wrote:
>
>> AIUGA0237GPIW
>>
>> If I've done my research correctly, that means it was manufactured in the
>> 37th week of 2002, and that means the multiplier isn't locked, right? If
>> that's the case it should just be a matter of making the changes in the
>> BIOS. I'm thinking of dropping the multiplier to 10.5 which would
>> actually underclock the CPU a bit.
>>
> Go with 11x166 (1833MHz) if you do anything. Raising FSB and dropping
> clockspeed counters each other.
>
>> Is my thinking correct on this? What are the consequences if it does
>> not work - will I still be able to get back into the BIOS and revert the
>> settings? Is it worth doing performance-wise?
>>
> Going with 11x166 will probably get you about 5% increase in performance.
> Is it worth it, I don't know, but it's free.🙂 Shouldn't be a problem,
> but if it is, clearing cmos should fix it.
>
> --
> Abit KT7-Raid (KT133) Tbred B core CPU @2400MHz (24x100FSB)
> http://wesnewell.no-ip.com/cpu.htm
>

I would say the first thing to try is to lower the multiplier in the BIOS
setup. If it works you know that it it unlocked and you have the potential
to experiment further.

If it doesn't work, the processor is locked and changing the value in the
BIOS won't make an ounce of difference anyway.

Either way, lowering the multiplier will not harm your CPU.

Glennbo

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: alt.comp.hardware.overclocking.amd (More info?)

On Sat, 29 Jan 2005 09:27:26 GMT, "Glennbo" <glenns.spambox@tesco.net>
wrote:

>
>"Wes Newell" <w.newell@TAKEOUTverizon.net> wrote in message
>news😛an.2005.01.29.05.00.56.69974@TAKEOUTverizon.net...
>>>
>> Going with 11x166 will probably get you about 5% increase in performance.
>> Is it worth it, I don't know, but it's free.🙂 Shouldn't be a problem,
>> but if it is, clearing cmos should fix it.
>>
>> --
>> Abit KT7-Raid (KT133) Tbred B core CPU @2400MHz (24x100FSB)
>> http://wesnewell.no-ip.com/cpu.htm
>>
>
>I would say the first thing to try is to lower the multiplier in the BIOS
>setup. If it works you know that it it unlocked and you have the potential
>to experiment further.
>
>If it doesn't work, the processor is locked and changing the value in the
>BIOS won't make an ounce of difference anyway.
>
>Either way, lowering the multiplier will not harm your CPU.
>
>Glennbo
>

Thanks to the both of you. Wes you're right on the money - at 11x166
Aquamark was 5% faster. I'll run with this for a while, thanks!

Jack
Remove your coat for email.