imported_Thawaxshop
New member
Hey i have a Opty 170 CCBWE 0551 and a Prometeia Mach II, anyone have any info on what this stepping can do under the freeze? any cold bug info? any info is apreciated
Opty 170 Overclocks
- Thread starter imported_Thawaxshop
- Start date
imported_Thawaxshop
New member
fatty said:Some are cold bugged but some are fine down to -30 core which should be ok for your mach also I have seen those chips down to 3.1 gig
P.S Welcome to the forum
thanks
im hoping its not bugged if so ill just sell it lolimported_Tim
New member
ccbwe shouldn't be cb'd.
I've seen 170's at 3.2ghz
I've seen 170's at 3.2ghz
imported_Thawaxshop
New member
well im gonna setup this whole thing probably this weekend and see what i get. I almost got a CCCB1E but read that they are really cb'd. I got this one brand new in box for $350Tim said:
imported_Thawaxshop
New member
any idea roughly on what to expect on the overclock im gonna get?
maverik-sg1
New member
2.8ghz maybe 2.9 benchable. Problem you will have is separating the core speed from the memory speed (setting memory at 166mhz instead of 200) and that will effect your score as the RAM runs slower than the cpu.
My 4600 that is for sale/trades does 3.2 under a mach (cold bug free)
Use 1.475x114% (push to 116% if required) and bump the HTT/FSB up to 290 (set DRAM at 166mhz), set LDT multiplier to x4, LDT voltage at 1.4v (startup voltage at 1.5v) and chipset voltage at 1.6v and see how far it goes.
If it wont boot into to windows but you get the start-up logo drop the HTT down to 280mhz, if it benches at that push back up 1mhz at a time running 3dmark03 as your stability test.
Make sure that you download and install the dual core driver from AMD.
Cheers
Mav
My 4600 that is for sale/trades does 3.2 under a mach (cold bug free)
Use 1.475x114% (push to 116% if required) and bump the HTT/FSB up to 290 (set DRAM at 166mhz), set LDT multiplier to x4, LDT voltage at 1.4v (startup voltage at 1.5v) and chipset voltage at 1.6v and see how far it goes.
If it wont boot into to windows but you get the start-up logo drop the HTT down to 280mhz, if it benches at that push back up 1mhz at a time running 3dmark03 as your stability test.
Make sure that you download and install the dual core driver from AMD.
Cheers
Mav
imported_Thawaxshop
New member
Hmm i was hoping for at least 3.0 hoped for 3.1 
maybe ill test it and if no go sell it.
maybe ill test it and if no go sell it.maverik-sg1
New member
name='phil123' said:
I guess it depends on your perspective - if like me you are one of the worlds best at what they do - the last thing you want is a divider.
However I take your point for very average Joes - or those that simply dont have the money to invest (or seek to invest in other areas) then a divider might not make 'that' much of a difference and is an easy sacrifice to make.
But it does make a difference - in extreme overclocked benchmarks, it's the difference between hall of fame and 'somewhere on the 3rd page' results.
imported_Thawaxshop
New member
Well tankguys is selling 165's CCBBE 0615 EPMW's do you think i should pick one of these up. is the stepping any good? how bout with my phase? I can always sell the 170 for it if i can get a higher OC
imported_Thawaxshop
New member
Dividers dont make a difference if the lower RAM speed allows tighter timings. The Subtimings change a bit, but you`ll only notice in SuperPi.
Also...assuming a CPU is cable of a speed that falls between neat 1:1 or neat RAM timings, i`d rather have the CPU speed.
E.G... A CPU is cable of 3350....that doesnt fall neatly on a 1:1 ratio unless its an FX (257x13) so for a normal CPU, it would have to be a divider, else 257*12 (assuming 12 multi) =3084... thats a lot of CPU speed to lose for RAM timings.
Again...just what i`ve found from my benching... I would only pay FX CPU money for the quality of silicon, and maybe in future, the extra cache
Also...assuming a CPU is cable of a speed that falls between neat 1:1 or neat RAM timings, i`d rather have the CPU speed.
E.G... A CPU is cable of 3350....that doesnt fall neatly on a 1:1 ratio unless its an FX (257x13) so for a normal CPU, it would have to be a divider, else 257*12 (assuming 12 multi) =3084... thats a lot of CPU speed to lose for RAM timings.
Again...just what i`ve found from my benching... I would only pay FX CPU money for the quality of silicon, and maybe in future, the extra cache
maverik-sg1
New member
K404 said:
The point is, if you had a choice you would have it, iirc our msn chat a week or two ago
Ultimately, you can have the best ram timings with the best overclock using an FX chip or a higher stock clocked A64 ( with a multiplier of x12 for example) and reach a much better clock with 1:1 ram timings using BH5, 268 @ 2-2-2-6 with x12 multiplier on an X2 core anyone??
The price of current a64 dual cores CPU's has never been better, and there has never been a better time to get yourself an FX single core CPU on the realatively cheap
name='maverik-sg1' said:
Thats true. Had another think about what i`m trying to say.. LOL.. lets assume a CPU is capable of 3490MHz (268x13) and the RAM can only do 265, 2-2-2-5.
I`d rather have the 3490 with the RAM running at 3490/14 (180 divider, giving 249 on the RAM) than 265x13 1:1.
The extra CPU speed will make up for the small loss in RAM performance due to higher Async latencies. Theres also a chance of getting CAS 1.5 out of the RAM, though thats slightly less likely to happen.
If the CPU maxxes out at a speed that gives the best RAM performance at 1:1, thats fantastic, but life aint always like that
Also, I say again, what works for me, may not work for other peeps A fine example of this being some of the page file tweaks ya gave me, just wasnt happening for me, but I did find out some other tweaks which I might just go post now...K
