|
|
 |
|
|
Pages: 1
System Bus Speed
(Click here to view the original thread with full colors/images)
Posted by: Ack1027
Hey, I was wondering how to change the bus speed of your computer. I don't really know much about bus controls and how it affects your processor speed but I know that increasing the frequency can allow your processor to run faster? [ Overclocking? ]
And also, What are the average healthy temperatures as well as the maximum temperatures you should allow your computer to be at after adjusting bus frequency?
Thanks for any help in advance.
Btw
My CPU temperature is 52-56 degrees celsius.
My system temperature is 21 degrees celsius.
These are at the present state with nothing adjusted.
Posted by: NegotiatorSmith
Yes, you can increase your processor speed by increasing your system bus speed (system bus speed x CPU multiplier = CPU speed). With modern computers, you can increase the system bus speed in the BIOS setup utility. With older computers, you'll probably have to change the speed via jumpers on the motherboard.
If you plan on overclocking your processor, I hope you do your homework first, just to make sure you know exactly what you're doing. 
As for your other question, I'd like to know that myself, I've never really gotten a definite answer. 
I have a Pentium 4 2.4 Ghz that usually runs at 35-40 degrees Celsius, and I haven't had any problems...
Posted by: Ack1027
Well originally this question wasn't for me, It was for my friend [ You know the one with the comp that took friggin 5 months to build ]
His Athlon XP 2200+ is running at like 1.32 Ghz or so, and 100 Frequency...Something like that....Sorry if I butchered that, but don't really know about this topic. >=\
And so he and I both thought it could run faster than that and be at nominal temperatures. And so I think it's at 200 Frequency right now. I think his temperatures are pretty high.
Also I even though I do not know the specifics of overclocking and how what you exactly need to do, I do know it's very dangerous to mess with overclocking if you don't know wtf you are doing. So therefore I haven't been a big ' Fan ' of overclocking. I'm just being very cautious because if that processor fries, I'm seriously going to suicide bomb Asus.
Anyway, He emailed Asus with his exact motherboard type [ I mortally despise that motherboard. ] and asked for good system and CPU temps.
So you may get your answer after all Smith.
Posted by: Bix VT
Well, optimally, your tems shouldn't ever go over 45c. My P4B 2.66 only goes up to 42 under load, and my new Mobile Athlon 2400+ which is running at 3200+ speeds, doesn't go past 40, but that's because I have this heatsink/fan combo. And I love it. I'd go as fast as 200fsb, but my ram is only rated at 166 (non-ddr) and it's PNY so it doesn't overclock very well.
But yeah, try to stay under 50 when running load, and under 40 when idle. 60+ is dangerous.
Posted by: Ack1027
Is there some software you need to constantly monitor your temperature or are you just looking in BIOS?
Posted by: Ack1027
I just messed around with my friends comp a little and got his processor going faster without getting the temperature into dangerous zones. [ 46-47 Degrees centigrade ]
I was just wondering what single channel mode meant, and can I switch to Dual channel mode?
Posted by: Bix VT
Single channel is normal RAM operation, where as dual channel uses 2 sticks of ram in sync and somehow makes it run faster. (I'm sure AoD will have a very detailed and technical response, much better than mine, and I look forward tor reading it)
As for your question about if you can switch, in order to run dual channel, you need two things: you need to have a mobo that supports dual channel, and you need to have 2 identical sticks of ram. Then you need to put them in the corresponding dimm slots, which are usually color coded, 1+3 and 2+4.
Posted by: The-AoD
(In request, or want of Bix. lol)
First, overclocking... Explained.
Overclocking is basically "pushing" your hardware beyond it's default limits. Basically, take it this way. Making your brand new car which is designed for 87 octane to run on 93 and higher. More performance, at the cost of heat and stability; or in the cars case, dependability. Overclocking stresses the components harder than they were designed initially to go. Basically, low amount of overclocking usually won't hurt anything, but theres always the chance. I wouldn't recommend overclocking to someone who hasn't went and actually researched the topic yet. Research, does a body good or somethang :P
Now, let me explain the basics, just so you know. First how overclocking works. Your processor comes with a multiplier built into the chip (Unless you're lucky and have an unlocked chip; such as the XP-Mobile). This is and the actual front side bus speed, not the speed of the DDR either, determine the final speed of the chip. For example.
A pentium 3 1000mhz that runs off a 100mhz front side bus would work like this.
10x (Multiplier) x 100Mhz (Front side bus) = 1000mhz (Final CPU Frequency)
Now, overclocking is basically making the above chip look something like...
10x (Multiplier) x 105Mhz (Front side bus) = 1050mhz (Final CPU Frequency)
Simple enough right? Most likely, unless you have an unlocked chip; you'd have to use the front side bus adjustments to overclock, which in this case, you'll be stressing your processor, chipset and motherboard, and the ram. Not to mention most motherboards increase the PCI frequency to match the system, which causes some PCI cards to run out of specifications as well. So, how people go about it is getting to a certain speed, and stressing the system harder than it normally would see; to acertain if the system is going to be stable under heavy loads. Temperatures are a main factor in this as well, and Bix is right. You definetly want to stay away from 50C if possible, and going above 60C is like holding your "car engine" at redline, and you don't want to do that.
Now, that's all I'm going to explain about overclocking, if you're still interested. I suggest a definete trip to GooGLe and doing a bit of research on overclocking before just "tinkering"; just for the fact of learning the possibilities and problems with overclocking.
Now, Bix, you've learned well. He's exactly right about the Dual channel. Only thing I'd have to say is about the identical chips.. The best idea is to have a "Dual Channel Pair Pack" so you know they are identical. You just can't have any two sticks that are the same size, as it might actually work for someone, in most cases it wont.
What does dual channel do?
Well, let's look at DDR first. DDR is basically a generation of SDram. DDR, or Double Data Rate, basically states the fact that the RAM can read and write (or send and recieve) information during the rising and falling of the channel. In other words, it can do two things at once, causing "double" the performance. This, in any case, causes the ram to run at twice the FSB, or at least really close. So in fact, if you're running 266mhz DDR at stock speeds on your motherboard, the actual front side bus is at 133, only doubled for the rams ability to do two things in one "slice" of it's chance, where the older standard SDram couldn't. Sorry if the explination sounds so "wierd", just trying to make it as "laymens terms" as possible for the lack of wanting to explain everything in heavy detail . Now for dual channel, basically this enables two chips to act at once. Instead of the memory bus only using one "signal" for the entire amount of ram, it actually enables the use of two. While using it correctly in fact, doubles the performance, and adds a second "channel" for the ram to be used by the system. There's your dual channel, and using it is another "double your speed" trick. If you have the ability, I highly suggest the Dual Channel ability; as it's probably the best "ability" with today's current platforms.
Ok, yeah, there's your explination you wanted Bix. And I hope it helps you understand a little more Ack. But for now, I'm going to watch Gothika again (Which comes out on DVD/VHS on tuesday, so if you get the chance get it!) {Thank you work perks... lol}
Posted by: IceBreaker
By Jupiter! and to think I'm at 50°C idle with my XP2400+, non-overclocked, with a copper-heatsink & radial fan set at max speed, Arctic Silver 3, and ambient (room) temp @ about 25° http://213.246.40.109/images/perso/oth.gif
Thing is, radial fans such as the Aero7 are extremely difficult to maintain as they quickly get clogged up with dust, along with the heatsink. I'm thinking of getting a new fan+heatsink..
The-Aod>
What about Intel's Quad-pump - is this some way of multiplying by 4 the effective speed of SDR (or by 8: Quad-pump=4X(with DDR sticks) + Dual channel=2x ??) ?
Something like "QDR" (Quadruple Data Ram)? 
Posted by: The-AoD
No, IceBreaker, that's what Dual Channel Architecture is. Not "QDR" :P
They consider it a "quad pumped" because of two channels that can run two commands at the same time. DDR x 2. Hence the reason 2 identical chips are required
While one is being used on a standard platform, the other has to wait. With dual channel, both can be used at the same time. So, you have the base, then 2x with DDR then 2x x 2x = 4x from the dual channel. Simple math, alot of dumb names used for advertising
Posted by: Bix VT
AoD: when I said two identical sticks of ram, I meant two IDENTICAL sticks of ram, such as come in the pair packs as you said. Because even if you get a stick of 512mb PNY 3200, and a stick of the same type of ram made by Kingston, they use different chips and different latencies, thus the need for the dual stick pack from the same brand. Also, thanks for the technical explanation.
IceBreaker: The only QDR I've ever seen is the FSB of the P4. Just a little bogus if you ask me, I don't see much of a performance difference between the DDR400FSB new Barton chips and the QDR800FSB of the P4C.
Oh, and also AoD: if your car was built to run at 87 octane fuel and you run at 92, it will actually last longer, because 92 octane burns hotter and cleaner, thus reducing carbon buildup and incresing the life of the engine. Overclocking your pc, however is the opposite.
Posted by: IceBreaker
hehe - another Intel-fallacy then - on Intel mboards, they flash "FSB800" in big writing when in fact it's only "FSB400" since there is absolutely no difference with nforce-based AMD mboards that support fsb400..
Or actually, it's the other way round - in both AMD & Intel cases it's (virtual)FSB800: 200 X2(DDR) X2(Dual Channel) = 800
Damn, now I'm confused... 
Posted by: redwench
yes, both speeds are the same. just like 800rdram is the same speed as pc3200
Posted by: The-AoD
 Quote:
Originally posted by Bix VT
Oh, and also AoD: if your car was built to run at 87 octane fuel and you run at 92, it will actually last longer, because 92 octane burns hotter and cleaner, thus reducing carbon buildup and incresing the life of the engine. Overclocking your pc, however is the opposite.
|
One thing about that, that any respected mechanic will tell you. Running hotter means more pressure. Which in turn, leads to more stress on the components, such as the piston, rings, cylinder walls, connecting rods, valves, crank shaft, ect.., ect... When it's specified for 87, the manufacturer sets it so for a reason. As 87 isn't the "best", it's better for lastability.
For an example, a car running 92 and the same running 87. The 92 will outperform the 87, get better milage, and run alot smoother. But, in turn the one running 87 will run cooler, under less pressure, while having a drop in power. The downsides to 92 outwiegh the 87 for the reliability of the actual engine, more than anything. When your engine runs hotter, it causes alot of stress on the cooling system. I personally have had a water pump go out just a few months ago, and it's not fun on a newer car to change
But basically it's the same idea in respect. While the chip may perform better, there's the downside of running hotter and stability issues.
(P.S. Ever seen a 454 running 93 octane while doing heavy hauling? I have, the rings were quite cooked. Funny that the dumbass who owned it didn't read where it specifically said, "87 octane only". )
Posted by: Bix VT
Oh, sure, if you're talking about muscle cars. I'm talking about newer asian-made cars, (1985 and on) which will run longer on 92. As for performance, there is ahardly a difference. On average, maybe a .5hp increase. I haven't worked on many 454s (pity, they are awesome engines) but I've spent many a summer working at my local garage. Working mainly on Chevys and Pontiacs, with a few Geos thrown in there every once in a while.
You may have worked on a 454, but have you ever driven one set for drag? That's a thrill like no other...
Posted by: The-AoD
LoL, I've driven a 454 that totaled out a pull of 10 tons
Not the same engine either, this one was a plow. POS truck for plowing, but probably the best street hauling "1 ton" out there. The truck all together empty was 4,800 pounds (Mostly because of the deeeeep bed that was put on it for the swensen spreader for winter), then add 8 tons worth of blacktop. Didn't seem like it bothered that motor at all. Specially going down the "4 lanes" at 55.
And I wasn't talking about "muscle" cars. I was talking more along the lines of todays average american made passenger cars and vans.
Posted by: Bix VT
Ah, a truck then. I see. You should really try that motor in a Chevy Chevelle SS...that thing will move. I can see it pulling a load that heavy though.
I see. American made, eh? Good stuff. Yes it would run hotter, but I think that it would be worth it, not having the carbon buildup (ever scraped a full mm of solid carbon off all of an Astro's 8 pistons? not fun)
But that's just my opinion, I have bad experiences with 87, you have the same with 92. Ah well.
While we're on the subject of cars, why is your avatar an olds logo?
Posted by: The-AoD
Quote:
Originally posted by Bix VT
While we're on the subject of cars, why is your avatar an olds logo?
|
I'd imagine it has something to do with my 1998 Oldsmobile Cutlass GLS sitting in my driveway... I love that car fo sho yo. Or some ghetto language typed freak nasty.
Leather, power everything, my pair of 12's in the back, yeaha.
Posted by: Bix VT
Nice...I'm still replacing my stock stereo piece by piece. Doesn't the Cutlass have a 3.2 V6?
Posted by: The-AoD
Bix, you have AIM by chance? It'd be alot easier to communicate over a chattish type IM client
But no, 3.1 V6
Posted by: Bix VT
I do indeed. Sir Bix of NFS.
|
|
|
|
|
