Overclocking Celeron 1.1 GHz

Any ideas on how to overclock a 1.1 GHz Celeron processor? My warranty is
expired and I'm looking for a free (or at least cheap) performance boost. I
can't find anything on my exact processor speed (though I've seen info for
1.0 and 1.2 GHz Celeron).

I don't know my FSB speed, but I think it's 100 MHz b/c I'm using a PC100
SDRAM module. My BIOS doesn't tell me anything--multiplier, exact CPU
speed, CPU temp, bus speeds, RAM timings, CPU voltage--nothing. Is there a
program that can find this for me? A program reports my CPU speed at 1085
MHz, so I'm guessin gmy multiplier now is 10.85 (8.1375 at 133 MHz), but
that seems totally wrong.

System config:
- HP Pavilion 7915 (crap)
- Pentium Celeron, 1100 MHz, 128 KB cache
- Intel 810 chipset
- Integrated audio and video
- 128 MB PC133 SDRAM + 64 MB PC100 SDRAM
- nVidia GeForce2 MX 200 (32 MB RAM) (PCI)

Please help me. I don't have time to sit around and watch Windows XP redraw
windows (yes, it's that slow--I multitask).

On Sun, 13 Jul 2003 05:25:09 GMT, "Colin Cogle"
wrote:

Any ideas on how to overclock a 1.1 GHz Celeron processor? My warranty is
expired and I'm looking for a free (or at least cheap) performance boost. I
can't find anything on my exact processor speed (though I've seen info for
1.0 and 1.2 GHz Celeron).

If you found 1.0G = 10x100 and 1.2G = 12x100, take a wild gues what
the 1.1G runs at.

I don't know my FSB speed, but I think it's 100 MHz b/c I'm using a PC100
SDRAM module.

Celeron 1.1G runs 100MHz FSB, and the memory doesn't tell a thing - it
can be asynchronous to FSB. Not the fastest solution though.

My BIOS doesn't tell me anything--multiplier, exact CPU
speed, CPU temp, bus speeds, RAM timings, CPU voltage--nothing. Is there a
program that can find this for me?

If the bios doesn't tell, it probably isn't supported. Would be a bit
surprising though, every PC I've seen in the last 5 years or so had at
least some form of harwaremonitoring. Try mbm.livewiredev.com, but
beware that it is a bit of a hassle to setup if you don't know your
mainboard.

A program reports my CPU speed at 1085
MHz, so I'm guessin gmy multiplier now is 10.85 (8.1375 at 133 MHz), but
that seems totally wrong.

Roundoff error due to inaccurate clock. It *is* definitely 11x100,
although it is probably not exactly 100MHz - 2MHz up or down is
nothing to be alarmed about.

System config:
- HP Pavilion 7915 (crap)
- Pentium Celeron, 1100 MHz, 128 KB cache
- Intel 810 chipset
- Integrated audio and video
- 128 MB PC133 SDRAM + 64 MB PC100 SDRAM
- nVidia GeForce2 MX 200 (32 MB RAM) (PCI)

Please help me. I don't have time to sit around and watch Windows XP redraw
windows (yes, it's that slow--I multitask).

A 1.1G celeron should be quite OK for XP, and not as slow as that.
I'm thinking memory. 192Mb for winXP is on the low side, especially
when running heavy or multiple tasks. Check your taskmanager to see
how much is actually in use - if you use significantly more than 192,
the system starts swapping like crazy, which is an absolute
performancekiller.
But if you still wanna overclock - the multiplier on the Celeron is
locked, so you are stuck with 11x something. So you gotta change the
FSB to something higher. Don't expect miracles though - you *might*
make it to 133MHz, but I doubt that HP will let you.

A Celeron 1100 is plenty fast enough that you shouldn't be seeing XP
'redraw' windows. To begin with, make sure you have the 810 graphics
disabled as it shares memory and that slows things down considerably.

I have it set to use half a meg of RAM (the minimum) in the BIOS. I've also
told the BIOS to use the PCI card for the boot display device. I took your
advice and disabled the 810 in Windows. It's running a tiny bit faster.

What do *you* mean by 'multitask'? If you mean you have a few MS Word,
browser, and such, windows open then that isn't much and you should not
be seeing excessive delays. And unless you have large apps then,
contrary to the other advice, 192 meg RAM should be adequate. XP, like
Windows 2000, takes about 96 meg on the base install and that leaves a
decent amount for normal work (the big question being: what is
'normal'?). Heck, I have a little Windows 2000 server running in only
128 Meg and don't see windows 'redraw' on it, but then I don't do a
whole lot on it either (I have 256 Meg on the 'busy' ones). Point is, I
need to know more about your setup and use to guess much more about the
speed. However, another thing to check is your disk space. XP, and
Windows 2000, will begin to bog down as the disk space usage exceeds 80%
or so. Also, what do you have your page file set for?

I do use memory-intensive apps, my page file is set to 1GB (not system
managed) on my only hard drive (NTFS, 4KB sectors). The disk, swap file and
MFT are all fragmented. I run defrag at least once a month. I might have
exaggerated when I said "redraw," but it does bog down at times. It's
relatively smooth, but I seem to only remember the slow times when the
Windows GUI turned to goo :-). For a person like me.

There are just lots of things to look for. Are you sure your hard drive
DMA is on? Turn off some of the display bells and whistles in performance
options. Have you checked for a virus? A trojan? Pull up task monitor
and see what's consuming CPU power, etc.

How do you check hard drive DMA under XP? I probably have turned it on and
forgotten that I did, though. I enjoy bells and whistles (look at my cell
phone), but they are off. The system's clean, there are no viruses. I
usually close any extra programs when things start to run slowly.



By the way, here's some more of my processor info, should it help.

CPU Identification utility v1.9 (c) 1997-2002 Jan
Steunebrink

ÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄ ÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄ
Ä
CPU Vendor and Model: Intel Celeron-E 733-1100 (or 500-933 mobile) D0-step
with 128 KB integrated L2 cache
Internal CPU speed : 1065.0 MHz
Clock Multiplier : Available only in Real Mode!
CPU-ID Vendor string: GenuineIntel
CPU-ID Signature : 068A
CPU Features : Floating-Point Unit on chip: Yes
Virtual Mode Extensions : Yes
Time Stamp Counter : Yes
MMX instruction set : Yes
3DNow! instruction set : No
Streaming SIMD Extensions : Yes
Current CPU mode : Virtual
Internal (L1) cache : Enabled in Write-Back mode
Size of L1 cache : 32 KB

Despite the fact that my CPU is a Coppermine, increasing voltage is
important. But the big question, before all that, how do you increase the
FSB speed?

"JeB" wrote in message
...
J.F. van Baarlen wrote:
On Sun, 13 Jul 2003 05:25:09 GMT, "Colin Cogle"
wrote:

Any ideas on how to overclock a 1.1 GHz Celeron processor? My
warranty is expired and I'm looking for a free (or at least cheap)
performance boost. I can't find anything on my exact processor
speed (though I've seen info for
1.0 and 1.2 GHz Celeron).

If you found 1.0G = 10x100 and 1.2G = 12x100, take a wild gues what
the 1.1G runs at.

I don't know my FSB speed, but I think it's 100 MHz b/c I'm using a
PC100 SDRAM module.

Celeron 1.1G runs 100MHz FSB, and the memory doesn't tell a thing - it
can be asynchronous to FSB. Not the fastest solution though.

My BIOS doesn't tell me anything--multiplier, exact CPU
speed, CPU temp, bus speeds, RAM timings, CPU voltage--nothing. Is
there a program that can find this for me?

If the bios doesn't tell, it probably isn't supported. Would be a bit
surprising though, every PC I've seen in the last 5 years or so had at
least some form of harwaremonitoring. Try mbm.livewiredev.com, but
beware that it is a bit of a hassle to setup if you don't know your
mainboard.

A program reports my CPU speed at 1085
MHz, so I'm guessin gmy multiplier now is 10.85 (8.1375 at 133 MHz),
but that seems totally wrong.

Roundoff error due to inaccurate clock. It *is* definitely 11x100,
although it is probably not exactly 100MHz - 2MHz up or down is
nothing to be alarmed about.

System config:
- HP Pavilion 7915 (crap)
- Pentium Celeron, 1100 MHz, 128 KB cache
- Intel 810 chipset
- Integrated audio and video
- 128 MB PC133 SDRAM + 64 MB PC100 SDRAM
- nVidia GeForce2 MX 200 (32 MB RAM) (PCI)

Please help me. I don't have time to sit around and watch Windows
XP redraw windows (yes, it's that slow--I multitask).

A 1.1G celeron should be quite OK for XP, and not as slow as that.
I'm thinking memory. 192Mb for winXP is on the low side, especially
when running heavy or multiple tasks. Check your taskmanager to see
how much is actually in use - if you use significantly more than 192,
the system starts swapping like crazy, which is an absolute
performancekiller.
But if you still wanna overclock - the multiplier on the Celeron is
locked, so you are stuck with 11x something. So you gotta change the
FSB to something higher. Don't expect miracles though - you *might*
make it to 133MHz, but I doubt that HP will let you.



Use the vcore pin mod to increase vcore to 1.65, ive forgotten the site i
got the info from, google for it, or hopefully someone can remember or
knows
where to get that info, I've got a picture i could email to you, if you
really want it. With this done you are 99% likely to reach 133FSB, however
you will need new PC133 memory, and since you are using windows XP, i
would
recommend 512MB.
HTH

My Specs:
Tualatin Celeron 1.1A @ 1.52 (138 FSB) Vcore @ 1.65 set with wire mod due
to
crap BIOS
256MB Crucial PC133 @ 2-2-3CL
Biostar M6VCF Motherboard (VIA Apollo Pro 133A Chipset 686/694A) CPU
modded
to work with this M/B
40GB Western Digital 8 MB Cache Hard Drive
Nvidia Geforce4 MX 440 Graphics Card 270/400 @ 290/490 On Detonator 44.03
Drivers
Windows 98SE



---
Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.495 / Virus Database: 294 - Release Date: 30/06/03

Colin Cogle wrote:
A Celeron 1100 is plenty fast enough that you shouldn't be seeing XP
'redraw' windows. To begin with, make sure you have the 810 graphics
disabled as it shares memory and that slows things down considerably.


I have it set to use half a meg of RAM (the minimum) in the BIOS. I've also
told the BIOS to use the PCI card for the boot display device. I took your
advice and disabled the 810 in Windows. It's running a tiny bit faster.

Good.


What do *you* mean by 'multitask'? If you mean you have a few MS Word,
browser, and such, windows open then that isn't much and you should not
be seeing excessive delays. And unless you have large apps then,
contrary to the other advice, 192 meg RAM should be adequate. XP, like
Windows 2000, takes about 96 meg on the base install and that leaves a
decent amount for normal work (the big question being: what is
'normal'?). Heck, I have a little Windows 2000 server running in only
128 Meg and don't see windows 'redraw' on it, but then I don't do a
whole lot on it either (I have 256 Meg on the 'busy' ones). Point is, I
need to know more about your setup and use to guess much more about the
speed. However, another thing to check is your disk space. XP, and
Windows 2000, will begin to bog down as the disk space usage exceeds 80%
or so. Also, what do you have your page file set for?


I do use memory-intensive apps,

Am I supposed to guess?

my page file is set to 1GB (not system
managed) on my only hard drive (NTFS, 4KB sectors).

Well, WHY is it set to 1 gig? 1 gig is way out of line for 192 meg of RAM.
Conversely, if it's using even a fraction of that then it's no wonder it seems
slow. 288 to 300 meg is more in line.

The disk, swap file and
MFT are all fragmented. I run defrag at least once a month. I might have
exaggerated when I said "redraw," but it does bog down at times. It's
relatively smooth, but I seem to only remember the slow times when the
Windows GUI turned to goo :-). For a person like me.


There are just lots of things to look for. Are you sure your hard drive
DMA is on? Turn off some of the display bells and whistles in performance
options. Have you checked for a virus? A trojan? Pull up task monitor
and see what's consuming CPU power, etc.


How do you check hard drive DMA under XP? I probably have turned it on and
forgotten that I did, though.

Hardware Manager, IDE controller properties.

I enjoy bells and whistles (look at my cell
phone), but they are off. The system's clean, there are no viruses. I
usually close any extra programs when things start to run slowly.

If it runs ok and then 'bogs down' you're apparently loading it up with
something. Pull up performance monitor, like I suggested, and track swap file
usage, memory usage, processor usage etc.



By the way, here's some more of my processor info, should it help.

CPU Identification utility v1.9 (c) 1997-2002 Jan
Steunebrink

ÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄ ÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄ
Ä
CPU Vendor and Model: Intel Celeron-E 733-1100 (or 500-933 mobile) D0-step
with 128 KB integrated L2 cache
Internal CPU speed : 1065.0 MHz
Clock Multiplier : Available only in Real Mode!
CPU-ID Vendor string: GenuineIntel
CPU-ID Signature : 068A
CPU Features : Floating-Point Unit on chip: Yes
Virtual Mode Extensions : Yes
Time Stamp Counter : Yes
MMX instruction set : Yes
3DNow! instruction set : No
Streaming SIMD Extensions : Yes
Current CPU mode : Virtual
Internal (L1) cache : Enabled in Write-Back mode
Size of L1 cache : 32 KB

What do *you* mean by 'multitask'? If you mean you have a few MS Word,
browser, and such, windows open then that isn't much and you should not
be seeing excessive delays. And unless you have large apps then,
contrary to the other advice, 192 meg RAM should be adequate. XP, like
Windows 2000, takes about 96 meg on the base install and that leaves a
decent amount for normal work (the big question being: what is
'normal'?). Heck, I have a little Windows 2000 server running in only
128 Meg and don't see windows 'redraw' on it, but then I don't do a
whole lot on it either (I have 256 Meg on the 'busy' ones). Point is, I
need to know more about your setup and use to guess much more about the
speed. However, another thing to check is your disk space. XP, and
Windows 2000, will begin to bog down as the disk space usage exceeds 80%
or so. Also, what do you have your page file set for?


I do use memory-intensive apps,

Am I supposed to guess?


If you must know, after opening up Kazaa (v2.5), Outlook Express (version 6)
and a few Internet Explorer (version 6, Service Pack 1) processes, it
sometimes gets a little slow. Kazaa is full of resource-using spyware, but
I shut down/disable as many as I can find.

...my page file is set to 1GB (not system
managed) on my only hard drive (NTFS, 4KB sectors).

Well, WHY is it set to 1 gig? 1 gig is way out of line for 192 meg of RAM.
Conversely, if it's using even a fraction of that then it's no wonder it
seems
slow. 288 to 300 meg is more in line.

I know that a gig is over-overkill, but I've got a 60 GB hard drive, and
since I have no problems with low disk space, I've let it stand until now.
As for why, I'm just using the fact that more physical RAM ameliorates a
slow system, but then I extrapolated that to virtual memory. I'll drop it
down to 288 MB (the recommended 1.5 times 192 MB).

The disk, swap file and
MFT are all fragmented. I run defrag at least once a month. I might
have
exaggerated when I said "redraw," but it does bog down at times. It's
relatively smooth, but I seem to only remember the slow times when the
Windows GUI turned to goo :-). For a person like me...


There are just lots of things to look for. Are you sure your hard drive
DMA is on? Turn off some of the display bells and whistles in
performance
options. Have you checked for a virus? A trojan? Pull up task monitor
and see what's consuming CPU power, etc.

How do you check hard drive DMA under XP? I probably have turned it on
and
forgotten that I did, though.

Hardware Manager, IDE controller properties.


I did have it on for all IDE devices.

I enjoy bells and whistles (look at my cell
phone), but they are off. The system's clean, there are no viruses. I
usually close any extra programs when things start to run slowly.

I only have "visual themes," "smooth edges of screen fonts" and "show window
contents while dragging" on. Everything else is off.

I like smooth curves. Shoot me.


If it runs ok and then 'bogs down' you're apparently loading it up with
something. Pull up performance monitor, like I suggested, and track swap
file
usage, memory usage, processor usage etc.


I am loading it up. I usually change priorities of non-essential tasks to
Below Normal or Low, and foreground apps to Above Normal or High (Realtime
if there's only one).



By the way, here's some more of my processor info, should it help.

CPU Identification utility v1.9 (c) 1997-2002 Jan
Steunebrink


ÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄ ÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄ
Ä
CPU Vendor and Model: Intel Celeron-E 733-1100 (or 500-933 mobile)
D0-step
with 128 KB integrated L2 cache
Internal CPU speed : 1065.0 MHz
Clock Multiplier : Available only in Real Mode!
CPU-ID Vendor string: GenuineIntel
CPU-ID Signature : 068A
CPU Features : Floating-Point Unit on chip: Yes
Virtual Mode Extensions : Yes
Time Stamp Counter : Yes
MMX instruction set : Yes
3DNow! instruction set : No
Streaming SIMD Extensions : Yes
Current CPU mode : Virtual
Internal (L1) cache : Enabled in Write-Back mode
Size of L1 cache : 32 KB

Colin Cogle wrote:
What do *you* mean by 'multitask'? If you mean you have a few MS Word,
browser, and such, windows open then that isn't much and you should not
be seeing excessive delays. And unless you have large apps then,
contrary to the other advice, 192 meg RAM should be adequate. XP, like
Windows 2000, takes about 96 meg on the base install and that leaves a
decent amount for normal work (the big question being: what is
'normal'?). Heck, I have a little Windows 2000 server running in only
128 Meg and don't see windows 'redraw' on it, but then I don't do a
whole lot on it either (I have 256 Meg on the 'busy' ones). Point is, I
need to know more about your setup and use to guess much more about the
speed. However, another thing to check is your disk space. XP, and
Windows 2000, will begin to bog down as the disk space usage exceeds 80%
or so. Also, what do you have your page file set for?


I do use memory-intensive apps,

Am I supposed to guess?



If you must know, after opening up Kazaa (v2.5), Outlook Express (version 6)
and a few Internet Explorer (version 6, Service Pack 1) processes, it
sometimes gets a little slow. Kazaa is full of resource-using spyware, but
I shut down/disable as many as I can find.

What I wondered is if you were doing something like huge photoshop files, or
media editing, etc. that would need a lot of memory but what you got there
shouldn't be putting a terrible strain on 192 meg. Easy enough to see if you
look in task manager though.

I occasioanlly run Kazza too and then run AdAware to find and remove the spyware
it loads up.

...my page file is set to 1GB (not system
managed) on my only hard drive (NTFS, 4KB sectors).

Well, WHY is it set to 1 gig? 1 gig is way out of line for 192 meg of RAM.
Conversely, if it's using even a fraction of that then it's no wonder it

seems

slow. 288 to 300 meg is more in line.


I know that a gig is over-overkill, but I've got a 60 GB hard drive, and
since I have no problems with low disk space, I've let it stand until now.
As for why, I'm just using the fact that more physical RAM ameliorates a
slow system, but then I extrapolated that to virtual memory. I'll drop it
down to 288 MB (the recommended 1.5 times 192 MB).

Increasing the page file doesn't have the same effect as increasing RAM.

I can't say that a huge page file is necessarily a 'problem' but when one has an
unidentified problem then anything out of the ordinary raises a red flag.

What I can imagine is windows, over time, adding things to it since there's so
much to play with and then having to do a fair amount of seeking, because of
it's size, to find things but that's just speculation.

The disk, swap file and
MFT are all fragmented. I run defrag at least once a month. I might

have

exaggerated when I said "redraw," but it does bog down at times. It's
relatively smooth, but I seem to only remember the slow times when the
Windows GUI turned to goo :-). For a person like me...



There are just lots of things to look for. Are you sure your hard drive
DMA is on? Turn off some of the display bells and whistles in

performance

options. Have you checked for a virus? A trojan? Pull up task monitor
and see what's consuming CPU power, etc.

How do you check hard drive DMA under XP? I probably have turned it on

and

forgotten that I did, though.

Hardware Manager, IDE controller properties.



I did have it on for all IDE devices.

Good. Figured it was but it was worth checking just to make sure.



I enjoy bells and whistles (look at my cell
phone), but they are off. The system's clean, there are no viruses. I
usually close any extra programs when things start to run slowly.


I only have "visual themes," "smooth edges of screen fonts" and "show window
contents while dragging" on. Everything else is off.

I like smooth curves. Shoot me.

Bang g

Actually, smooth screen fonts is supposedly one of the more 'heavy duty' frills
and even on my XP2000+ Windows leaves that as the only thing off when you let it
chose "what's best for my computer."

It sure does look a heck of a lot better though when it's on and I doubt that's
your problem as I can't see why it would 'get worse' as time goes on.


If it runs ok and then 'bogs down' you're apparently loading it up with
something. Pull up performance monitor, like I suggested, and track swap

file

usage, memory usage, processor usage etc.



I am loading it up. I usually change priorities of non-essential tasks to
Below Normal or Low, and foreground apps to Above Normal or High (Realtime
if there's only one).

You just set off every alarm bell and red flag on the alert panel here. Unless
one really knows what they're doing, messing around with task priorities can
cause all kinds of problems as it isn't always intuitively obvious what the
interactions are. I'd strongly suggest you put everything back to the priority
windows expects and look to performance monitor to see what your memory, task,
CPU, and page file usage is to find the bottleneck. Unless, of course, you
really know what you're doing.


By the way, here's some more of my processor info, should it help.

CPU Identification utility v1.9 (c) 1997-2002 Jan
Steunebrink



ÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄ ÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄ

Ä
CPU Vendor and Model: Intel Celeron-E 733-1100 (or 500-933 mobile)

D0-step

with 128 KB integrated L2 cache
Internal CPU speed : 1065.0 MHz
Clock Multiplier : Available only in Real Mode!
CPU-ID Vendor string: GenuineIntel
CPU-ID Signature : 068A
CPU Features : Floating-Point Unit on chip: Yes
Virtual Mode Extensions : Yes
Time Stamp Counter : Yes
MMX instruction set : Yes
3DNow! instruction set : No
Streaming SIMD Extensions : Yes
Current CPU mode : Virtual
Internal (L1) cache : Enabled in Write-Back mode
Size of L1 cache : 32 KB

"Colin Cogle" wrote
"David Maynard" wrote

"Colin Cogle" wrote
I usually change priorities of non-essential tasks to
Below Normal or Low, and foreground apps to Above
Normal or High (Realtime if there's only one).

You just set off every alarm bell and red flag on the alert panel here.
Unless
one really knows what they're doing, messing around with task priorities
can
cause all kinds of problems as it isn't always intuitively obvious what
the
interactions are. I'd strongly suggest you put everything back to the
priority
windows expects and look to performance monitor to see what your memory,
task,
CPU, and page file usage is to find the bottleneck. Unless, of course,
you
really know what you're doing.

Tough call here. I do know what I'm doing (when I try to resize my system
partition's clusters down to 512 bytes and move it ~900 megabytes up the
disk), but something always goes wrong (such as when it crashes and the
only
copy of your data ends up trashed). True story. I don't do it a lot, but
sometimes I drop down Kazaa and raise something else. I'd say with
priorities, I've got it down.

Raising any CPU intensive process to 'Realtime' priority can stop the system
responding to the point you have to hard reset it..! Raising processes to
'High' priority might be the cause of 'Windows drawing slowly' too - David
Maynard is spot on with that one IMO. Personally I'd reboot and leave
everything strictly as-is, although lowering Kazaa priority should be no
problem...

Ciao...

[UK]_Nick...
--
Nick M V Salmon Master Mariner MN(Retd.)

My four