Intel clock frequency?

  • Thread starter Thread starter SleeperMan
  • Start date Start date
S

SleeperMan

I just got a PC from a friend to sort out a bit. At bootup it showed Intel
Celeron 2.2G. I went into BIOS, set FSB to 133 (before it was just FSB
control disabled, nothing about current frequency). Now at start it shows
Celeron 2.93 G and below DRAM frequency 354 MHz. In BIOS RAM freq is set to
133/266 . MOBO is Gigaset GA-8PE800 Ultra.

After more than half hour of work(like defrag, working with disc, sorting
etc), temp is 41 degrees, so it's not overheating.
IS this setting correct ?
THX
 
SleeperMan said:
I just got a PC from a friend to sort out a bit. At bootup it showed Intel
Celeron 2.2G. I went into BIOS, set FSB to 133 (before it was just FSB
control disabled, nothing about current frequency). Now at start it shows
Celeron 2.93 G and below DRAM frequency 354 MHz. In BIOS RAM freq is set to
133/266 . MOBO is Gigaset GA-8PE800 Ultra.

After more than half hour of work(like defrag, working with disc, sorting
etc), temp is 41 degrees, so it's not overheating.
IS this setting correct ?
THX
Click to expand...
All socket 478 Celerons to date are 400MHz quad pumped, i.e. 100MHz FSB.
However, they do overclock easily very often by a large margin. My wife's
2.4 has been running at 3.4 for months, my own P4-2.8 has been rock solid at
3.5GHz for some months too. Neither of them exceeds 45C at full load. I've
modified my case to duct external air straight to the CPU fan, her's is a
microATX desktop case with an extra fan added.
 
Alien Zord typed:
All socket 478 Celerons to date are 400MHz quad pumped, i.e. 100MHz
FSB. However, they do overclock easily very often by a large margin.
My wife's
2.4 has been running at 3.4 for months, my own P4-2.8 has been rock
solid at
3.5GHz for some months too. Neither of them exceeds 45C at full load.
I've modified my case to duct external air straight to the CPU fan,
her's is a microATX desktop case with an extra fan added.
Click to expand...

So, i guess if i set FSB to some moderate value, like 112 or 120, it should
be OK...
I just thought that all nowaday CPUs use 133 MHz...
Thanks!
 
SleeperMan said:
Alien Zord typed:


So, i guess if i set FSB to some moderate value, like 112 or 120, it should
be OK...
Click to expand...


Not necessarily. 100 and 133MHz are standard frequencies with the PCI bus
remaining at 33MHz. At intermediate frequencies it may not stay that way. On
my wife's PC even a 5% increase in PCI frequency will make the on-board
sound interface disappear.

I just thought that all nowaday CPUs use 133 MHz...
Click to expand...
No, upper end CPUs nowadays are 166 or 200MHz.
 
Alien Zord typed:
Not necessarily. 100 and 133MHz are standard frequencies with the PCI
bus remaining at 33MHz. At intermediate frequencies it may not stay
that way. On my wife's PC even a 5% increase in PCI frequency will
make the on-board sound interface disappear.


No, upper end CPUs nowadays are 166 or 200MHz.
Click to expand...

So, try and see is only thing to do. I just learned one thing more...
 
Alien Zord typed:
Not necessarily. 100 and 133MHz are standard frequencies with the PCI
bus remaining at 33MHz. At intermediate frequencies it may not stay
that way. On my wife's PC even a 5% increase in PCI frequency will
make the on-board sound interface disappear.
Click to expand...


I forgot to tell...like my (old) Soyo Dragon + mobo, which can be
overclocked up to 233 M in 1 M increments (note that at time it was made 133
CPU's were highest available), but in practice it all stops at 145 M or so,
because chipset and other minor stuff begins to fail or freeze at higher
freq. What a ****ing liars they are!!! But it runs perfect at 140 M and
overall is a solid mobo. I never overclocked too much anyway. I guess i'm
too afraid...
 
SleeperMan said:
Alien Zord typed:


So, try and see is only thing to do. I just learned one thing more...
Click to expand...

Why not just leave it at 133? That is the sensible thing to do.
 
~misfit~ typed:
Why not just leave it at 133? That is the sensible thing to do.
Click to expand...

Good question. Since it's not my PC, and still under warranty, i wonder what
will happen if CPU dies. However, from i've seen now, PC runs hell a lot
faster so, it's really good question...
 
SleeperMan said:
~misfit~ typed:


Good question. Since it's not my PC, and still under warranty, i
wonder what will happen if CPU dies. However, from i've seen now, PC
runs hell a lot faster so, it's really good question...
Click to expand...

The CPU won't die, the worst that can happen is that it will get hot and
then it will shut down. Intel CPUs have thermal protection. If it ever has
to go back for anything under warranty just clock it back before it gets
sent in. I wouldn't mess around with settings between 100 and 133, it'll put
the PCI and AGP busses out of spec and could cause HDD corruption. At 133
it's all good though.

IMO those P4 Celerons are pretty useless until they get to around 3Ghz
anyway.

Welcome to the world of overclocking! I have two Celeron 600s running at 900
and an Athlon XP1800+ (stock speed 1.53Ghz) running at 2.1Ghz. The
performance increase on all those machines is amazing, really noticable.
 
~misfit~ typed:
The CPU won't die, the worst that can happen is that it will get hot
and then it will shut down. Intel CPUs have thermal protection. If it
ever has to go back for anything under warranty just clock it back
before it gets sent in. I wouldn't mess around with settings between
100 and 133, it'll put the PCI and AGP busses out of spec and could
cause HDD corruption. At 133 it's all good though.

IMO those P4 Celerons are pretty useless until they get to around 3Ghz
anyway.

Welcome to the world of overclocking! I have two Celeron 600s running
at 900 and an Athlon XP1800+ (stock speed 1.53Ghz) running at 2.1Ghz.
The performance increase on all those machines is amazing, really
noticable.
Click to expand...

Aha...Good advice. I'll check out temp for a while again before i decide and
take it back to him.
 
SleeperMan said:
~misfit~ typed:


Aha...Good advice. I'll check out temp for a while again before i
decide and take it back to him.
Click to expand...

Yep, run something CPU intensive. Download and run Prime95 and run it in
'torture-test' mode for a few hours. That's about as hot as the CPU will
ever get. Also, it will test to see if the system is stable at that speed
without needing a core voltage increase. (Any errors and it needs a little
more vcore).
 
~misfit~ typed:
Yep, run something CPU intensive. Download and run Prime95 and run it
in 'torture-test' mode for a few hours. That's about as hot as the
CPU will ever get. Also, it will test to see if the system is stable
at that speed without needing a core voltage increase. (Any errors
and it needs a little more vcore).
Click to expand...

I did that and temp showed about 70 deg... it seems that this CPU really
cools down very quickly, when i reboot and get into BIOS, it's already
cool... so, from i see, it's better to stay at safe 100 M...
 
SleeperMan said:
~misfit~ typed:


I did that and temp showed about 70 deg... it seems that this CPU
really cools down very quickly, when i reboot and get into BIOS, it's
already cool... so, from i see, it's better to stay at safe 100 M...
Click to expand...

70°C is fine under maximum load. That's as hot as it's *ever* going to get,
unless ambient temp rises considerably, or the PC is kept in a very dusty
place and the heatsink fins fill up with dust. Unless the machine is ever
going to be used for extended CPU intensive tasks like DivX encoding (And if
it is, he'll thank you for the increased speed) the CPU won't reach near
that temp under normal usage.

Your call of course, however I see no reason to not leave it at 133Mhz and
good reason to keep it fast. If you're concerned, and there's a place for
one, you could add a case fan to keep more air moving through the case and
the CPU cooler. However, as I said, 70° is fine, especially with an Intel
and their built-in-to-the-CPU thermal throttling.

P.S. I see you've been posting about this system to
alt.comp.hardware.overclocking, anotherone of my regular groups.
 
~misfit~ typed:
70°C is fine under maximum load. That's as hot as it's *ever* going
to get, unless ambient temp rises considerably, or the PC is kept in
a very dusty place and the heatsink fins fill up with dust. Unless
the machine is ever going to be used for extended CPU intensive tasks
like DivX encoding (And if it is, he'll thank you for the increased
speed) the CPU won't reach near that temp under normal usage.

Your call of course, however I see no reason to not leave it at
133Mhz and good reason to keep it fast. If you're concerned, and
there's a place for one, you could add a case fan to keep more air
moving through the case and the CPU cooler. However, as I said, 70°
is fine, especially with an Intel and their built-in-to-the-CPU
thermal throttling.

P.S. I see you've been posting about this system to
alt.comp.hardware.overclocking, anotherone of my regular groups.
Click to expand...

70 seems so high...my AMD never goes above 50. But then again, i do have
Zalman heatsink, so it's normal...
I posted into two groups, because i didn't know, which one is better to this
specific problem. But, as i see, there's pleny of guys villing to help. I
thank you all.
 
70 seems so high...my AMD never goes above 50. But then again, i do have
Zalman heatsink, so it's normal...
I posted into two groups, because i didn't know, which one is better to this
specific problem. But, as i see, there's pleny of guys villing to help. I
thank you all.
Click to expand...

70 isn't necessarily a risk for short-term damage, but it would be good to
extensively test the CPU, verify it isn't producing errors at that temp.
Prime95 torture test ran for MANY hours would be a good first test.
 
kony typed:
On Wed, 26 May 2004 17:51:06 +0200, "SleeperMan"



70 isn't necessarily a risk for short-term damage, but it would be
good to extensively test the CPU, verify it isn't producing errors at
that temp. Prime95 torture test ran for MANY hours would be a good
first test.
Click to expand...

I'll find it and run it.Thanks.
 
SleeperMan said:
kony typed:


I'll find it and run it.Thanks.
Click to expand...

Oy! I suggested that further back, (well, not the "many" hours) and you said
you'd done it!


Download and run the latest version of Motherboard Monitor as well so you
can actually monitor the CPU temp in real-time, without having to re-boot to
see what the BIOS says.
 
~misfit~ typed:
Oy! I suggested that further back, (well, not the "many" hours) and
you said you'd done it!
Click to expand...


Opss....forgot about it....sorry


Download and run the latest version of Motherboard Monitor as well so
you can actually monitor the CPU temp in real-time, without having to
re-boot to see what the BIOS says.
Click to expand...

I have MBM installed. I guess i have to run torture test, from i see. After
half an hour it doesn't go above 70 deg, so i guess it's fine, but still
maybe i should reccomend him a better CPU cooler, not stock one. Then it
would be even lower...
 
Back
Top