Changing 'default' FSB speed with Tualatin?

On Fri, 23 Jul 2004 04:46:59 +0200, Spajky wrote:

The caps for Tuallies on board should be around 50% greater value than
for older Cpus, because Tualies suck more current & is advisable to
mount some HS on original voltage regulators ....

today I will mount additional 4x4 small fan /5-7V/ to my mosfets HS &
will cool also my caps better! (after I wake up...) :-)
& PSU intake fan will be running even when PC will be OFF /but PSU on/
(at 3,5V) to cool down a +5Vsb transistor in the 2-fan-PSU a bit so
these days summer heat won´t PSU be warm even if PC is off like it is
now...
--
Regards, SPAJKY ®
& visit my site @ http://www.spajky.vze.com
"Tualatin OC-ed / BX-Slot1 / inaudible setup!"
E-mail AntiSpam: remove ##

P2B wrote:
~misfit~ wrote:

P2B wrote:

Spajky wrote:


On Tue, 20 Jul 2004 10:14:52 +1200, "~misfit~"
wrote:



Also, Spajky, what speed do you have your Tui at and how many
marks does it get with CPUMark99 on a BX?


1.0A@1,35G
I tested it with PCMark2002 & I get 3400 points ...

CPUMark99, 1.0A@1500Mhz = 132
CPUMark99, P3-S@1575Mhz = 143

(both on a P2B-S)

More Tualatin on BX benchmarks at tipperlinne.com/benchmark.htm


Wow! Those are good numbers. I might have to have another attempt at
getting one of these Tuis to work in a BX board. I wish I could find
a couple of P2B's.

I checked your page, your CPUMark figure for a Tui Celeron 1400 (14
x 100) of 123 is amazing. I tried the same CPU in this board I have
and got 87.3. Huge difference.

Note that my figure of 123 was for 10 x 140Mhz,

Damn! It was too. I thought it was 14 x 100.

and is consistent with
Spajky's 118 for 10 x 135Mhz. Your 87.3 would have been for 14 x
100Mhz

Yep, on a Via board with OB video/audio/LAN.

- so when Spajky says "Fsb doesn´t matter much" I must
disagree :-)

I've noticed with CPUMark99 that, when bumping up FSB the increase in score
isn't directly proportional to CPU speed, FSB has a large effect on it.
Strange considering that it's supposed to be a CPU benchmark, not a
CPU/Memory sub-system benchmark.

FSB rules on a P2B, 'cos memory is the bottleneck.

Shame as the two Tualerons I have currently are high multi's, 14 and 13. I'm
not going to get a huge FSB increase out of those. I've just ordered a
Slot-T, should be here, if not tomorrow then after the weekend. I don't have
a P2B to run it in but I do have a 6163 Pro. Still, you got 86.5 for a 10 x
100 so I'm hoping that the 14 x 100 on a BX will give me a better score than
the Via POS board does.
--
~misfit~

On Fri, 23 Jul 2004 21:40:06 +1200, "~misfit~"
wrote:

Note that my figure of 123 was for 10 x 140Mhz,

Damn! It was too. I thought it was 14 x 100.

me too! (gotta buy new glasses... :-)

and is consistent with
Spajky's 118 for 10 x 135Mhz. Your 87.3 would have been for 14 x
100Mhz

Yep, on a Via board with OB video/audio/LAN.

Putin´ Tuallies on old non BX MoBo is a waste IMHO ...

I've noticed with CPUMark99 that, when bumping up FSB the increase in score
isn't directly proportional to CPU speed, FSB has a large effect on it.
Strange considering that it's supposed to be a CPU benchmark, not a
CPU/Memory sub-system benchmark.

Still, you got 86.5 for a 10 x
100 so I'm hoping that the 14 x 100 on a BX will give me a better score than
the Via POS board does.

hope!

On Fri, 23 Jul 2004 04:46:59 +0200, Spajky wrote:
will mount additional 4x4 small fan /5-7V/ to my mosfets HS &
will cool also my caps better!
& PSU intake fan will be running even when PC will be OFF /but PSU on/
at 3,1V) to cool down a +5Vsb transistor in the 2-fan-PSU a bit so
these days summer heat won´t PSU be warm even if PC is off ....

(MoBo caps & mosfets temps droped for few °C)

done that & repaired stuff, hope will last now for awhile; will update
my site soon with new pics ...
--
Regards, SPAJKY ®
& visit my site @ http://www.spajky.vze.com
"Tualatin OC-ed / BX-Slot1 / inaudible setup!"
E-mail AntiSpam: remove ##

Spajky wrote:
On Fri, 23 Jul 2004 21:40:06 +1200, "~misfit~"
wrote:

Note that my figure of 123 was for 10 x 140Mhz,

Damn! It was too. I thought it was 14 x 100.

me too! (gotta buy new glasses... :-)

and is consistent with
Spajky's 118 for 10 x 135Mhz. Your 87.3 would have been for 14 x
100Mhz

Yep, on a Via board with OB video/audio/LAN.

Putin´ Tuallies on old non BX MoBo is a waste IMHO ...

Well, I should have a Slot-T in the next few days, it's been paid for,
dispatched and I have the tracking number. I'll pull this Celly 600@900 out
of the 6163 it's in and hopefully the 1.4 and Slot-T will work in it without
any problems (fingers crossed). It's gotta be better than 87.3 CPU Marks.

I've noticed with CPUMark99 that, when bumping up FSB the increase
in score isn't directly proportional to CPU speed, FSB has a large
effect on it. Strange considering that it's supposed to be a CPU
benchmark, not a CPU/Memory sub-system benchmark.

Still, you got 86.5 for a 10 x
100 so I'm hoping that the 14 x 100 on a BX will give me a better
score than the Via POS board does.

hope!

I'm hoping. I couldn't really afford the Slot-T. I'm also hoping it'll do 14
x 110.

On Fri, 23 Jul 2004 04:46:59 +0200, Spajky
wrote:
will mount additional 4x4 small fan /5-7V/ to my mosfets HS &
will cool also my caps better!
& PSU intake fan will be running even when PC will be OFF /but PSU
on/
at 3,1V) to cool down a +5Vsb transistor in the 2-fan-PSU a bit so
these days summer heat won´t PSU be warm even if PC is off ....

(MoBo caps & mosfets temps droped for few °C)

That can only be good.

done that & repaired stuff, hope will last now for awhile; will update
my site soon with new pics ...

I'll check it out when you do.

Cheers,
--
~misfit~

P2B wrote:
~misfit~ wrote:

I checked your page, your CPUMark figure for a Tui Celeron 1400 (14
x 100) of 123 is amazing. I tried the same CPU in this board I have
and got 87.3. Huge difference.

Note that my figure of 123 was for 10 x 140Mhz, and is consistent with
Spajky's 118 for 10 x 135Mhz. Your 87.3 would have been for 14 x
100Mhz

Update:

My 1.4Ghz Tualeron returned 87.3 CPU Marks on the Gigabyte GA-6VEML mobo.
The board has on-board video, sound and LAN and a VIA (barf!) chipset. At
110 FSB it gave 95 marks but wasn't stable. I ran Prime for an hour and it
seemed fine but then it was returning SETI WU's early.

I got a Slot-T today and fiited it into my only MSI 6163 Pro 440BX mobo of
the three I have that *doesn't* have bulging caps. At default (14 x 100) I
got 110 marks! That is good huh? BX does indeed rock! I increased the FSB to
110Mhz (Prime running now, into it's second hour) for 1.536Ghz and got 118
marks. Now, that's good and all, however, I expected a little higher. With
just a 10% CPU speed increase you'd expect 121 marks (110% of 110) and with
the increase in FSB/memory bandwidth maybe more. Still, I'm happy. 118
instead of 87.3 is a worthwhile improvement I think. I don't think I'll even
try 115Mhz FSB (the next available setting) as I don't think it will give a
great improvement in CPU marks and will put my PCI/AGP busses even further
out-of-spec. Well, maybe I will. :-) 1.6Ghz sounds good to me. Maybe I'll
need to raise vcore a bit though.

MBM5 is giving me a vcore of 1.47v with the jumpers on the Slot-T set to
1.5v. Seems fine though. I hot-glued a 40mm fan to the back of the case,
just above the I/O shield as the FET's behind the slot were getting
uncomfortably hot. It seems to have cooled them considerably. If I *do* try
115FSB I'll let you all know how it goes.

Cheers,
--
~misfit~

~misfit~ wrote:

P2B wrote:
~misfit~ wrote:

I checked your page, your CPUMark figure for a Tui Celeron 1400 (14
x 100) of 123 is amazing. I tried the same CPU in this board I have
and got 87.3. Huge difference.

Note that my figure of 123 was for 10 x 140Mhz, and is consistent with
Spajky's 118 for 10 x 135Mhz. Your 87.3 would have been for 14 x
100Mhz

Update:

My 1.4Ghz Tualeron returned 87.3 CPU Marks on the Gigabyte GA-6VEML mobo.
The board has on-board video, sound and LAN and a VIA (barf!) chipset. At
110 FSB it gave 95 marks but wasn't stable. I ran Prime for an hour and it
seemed fine but then it was returning SETI WU's early.

I got a Slot-T today and fiited it into my only MSI 6163 Pro 440BX mobo of
the three I have that *doesn't* have bulging caps. At default (14 x 100) I
got 110 marks! That is good huh? BX does indeed rock! I increased the FSB to
110Mhz (Prime running now, into it's second hour) for 1.536Ghz and got 118
marks. Now, that's good and all, however, I expected a little higher. With
just a 10% CPU speed increase you'd expect 121 marks (110% of 110) and with
the increase in FSB/memory bandwidth maybe more. Still, I'm happy. 118
instead of 87.3 is a worthwhile improvement I think. I don't think I'll even
try 115Mhz FSB (the next available setting) as I don't think it will give a
great improvement in CPU marks and will put my PCI/AGP busses even further
out-of-spec. Well, maybe I will. :-) 1.6Ghz sounds good to me. Maybe I'll
need to raise vcore a bit though.

MBM5 is giving me a vcore of 1.47v with the jumpers on the Slot-T set to
1.5v. Seems fine though. I hot-glued a 40mm fan to the back of the case,
just above the I/O shield as the FET's behind the slot were getting
uncomfortably hot. It seems to have cooled them considerably. If I *do* try
115FSB I'll let you all know how it goes.

Cheers,
--
~misfit~

Cool..Gotta love these Tualatins. I'm still running my 1.0A at 1.33Ghz
CAS2 on a 815 chipset and get 113 CPU Marks. Not bad for a $50 CPU.

)-()-( wrote:


~misfit~ wrote:


P2B wrote:

~misfit~ wrote:

I checked your page, your CPUMark figure for a Tui Celeron 1400 (14
x 100) of 123 is amazing. I tried the same CPU in this board I have
and got 87.3. Huge difference.

Note that my figure of 123 was for 10 x 140Mhz, and is consistent with
Spajky's 118 for 10 x 135Mhz. Your 87.3 would have been for 14 x
100Mhz

Update:

My 1.4Ghz Tualeron returned 87.3 CPU Marks on the Gigabyte GA-6VEML mobo.
The board has on-board video, sound and LAN and a VIA (barf!) chipset. At
110 FSB it gave 95 marks but wasn't stable. I ran Prime for an hour and it
seemed fine but then it was returning SETI WU's early.

I got a Slot-T today and fiited it into my only MSI 6163 Pro 440BX mobo of
the three I have that *doesn't* have bulging caps. At default (14 x 100) I
got 110 marks! That is good huh? BX does indeed rock! I increased the FSB to
110Mhz (Prime running now, into it's second hour) for 1.536Ghz and got 118
marks. Now, that's good and all, however, I expected a little higher. With
just a 10% CPU speed increase you'd expect 121 marks (110% of 110) and with
the increase in FSB/memory bandwidth maybe more. Still, I'm happy. 118
instead of 87.3 is a worthwhile improvement I think. I don't think I'll even
try 115Mhz FSB (the next available setting) as I don't think it will give a
great improvement in CPU marks and will put my PCI/AGP busses even further
out-of-spec. Well, maybe I will. :-) 1.6Ghz sounds good to me. Maybe I'll
need to raise vcore a bit though.

MBM5 is giving me a vcore of 1.47v with the jumpers on the Slot-T set to
1.5v. Seems fine though. I hot-glued a 40mm fan to the back of the case,
just above the I/O shield as the FET's behind the slot were getting
uncomfortably hot. It seems to have cooled them considerably. If I *do* try
115FSB I'll let you all know how it goes.

Cheers,
--
~misfit~


Cool..Gotta love these Tualatins. I'm still running my 1.0A at 1.33Ghz
CAS2 on a 815 chipset and get 113 CPU Marks. Not bad for a $50 CPU.

IMHO the 1.0A is the best overclocking CPU since the 300A - 132 CPU
Marks at 1.5Ghz CAS2 on a P2B-S (BX chipset). For comparison, a P3-S
running at 1.575Ghz on the same hardware only gets 143 CPU Marks, but
costs 4 times the price.

P2B

P2B wrote:
)-()-( wrote:


~misfit~ wrote:


P2B wrote:

~misfit~ wrote:

I checked your page, your CPUMark figure for a Tui Celeron 1400
(14 x 100) of 123 is amazing. I tried the same CPU in this board
I have and got 87.3. Huge difference.

Note that my figure of 123 was for 10 x 140Mhz, and is consistent
with Spajky's 118 for 10 x 135Mhz. Your 87.3 would have been for
14 x 100Mhz

Update:

My 1.4Ghz Tualeron returned 87.3 CPU Marks on the Gigabyte GA-6VEML
mobo. The board has on-board video, sound and LAN and a VIA (barf!)
chipset. At 110 FSB it gave 95 marks but wasn't stable. I ran Prime
for an hour and it seemed fine but then it was returning SETI WU's
early.

I got a Slot-T today and fiited it into my only MSI 6163 Pro 440BX
mobo of the three I have that *doesn't* have bulging caps. At
default (14 x 100) I got 110 marks! That is good huh? BX does
indeed rock! I increased the FSB to 110Mhz (Prime running now, into
it's second hour) for 1.536Ghz and got 118 marks. Now, that's good
and all, however, I expected a little higher. With just a 10% CPU
speed increase you'd expect 121 marks (110% of 110) and with the
increase in FSB/memory bandwidth maybe more. Still, I'm happy. 118
instead of 87.3 is a worthwhile improvement I think. I don't think
I'll even try 115Mhz FSB (the next available setting) as I don't
think it will give a great improvement in CPU marks and will put my
PCI/AGP busses even further out-of-spec. Well, maybe I will. :-)
1.6Ghz sounds good to me. Maybe I'll need to raise vcore a bit
though.

MBM5 is giving me a vcore of 1.47v with the jumpers on the Slot-T
set to
1.5v. Seems fine though. I hot-glued a 40mm fan to the back of the
case, just above the I/O shield as the FET's behind the slot were
getting uncomfortably hot. It seems to have cooled them
considerably. If I *do* try 115FSB I'll let you all know how it
goes.

Cool..Gotta love these Tualatins. I'm still running my 1.0A at
1.33Ghz CAS2 on a 815 chipset and get 113 CPU Marks. Not bad for a
$50 CPU.

IMHO the 1.0A is the best overclocking CPU since the 300A - 132 CPU
Marks at 1.5Ghz CAS2 on a P2B-S (BX chipset). For comparison, a P3-S
running at 1.575Ghz on the same hardware only gets 143 CPU Marks, but
costs 4 times the price.

Well, as y'all probably guessed I would, I set it to 115Mhz FSB and
1.55vcore and it running sweet as a nut at 1.61Ghz. Only 127 CPU Marks,
which I'm happy with but a lot less than I'd get at 1.6Ghz low multi/high
FSB. That's with PC100 RAM, cas3. I've got some PC133/cas2 RAM in one of my
machines running at 100Mhz, I'll have to start popping hoods and look for
it. Prime95 ran for over three hours before I decided it was fine and
started SETI. If it plays up SETI Spy log is almost as good an indicator of
trouble.

Tualatin's are great. I have a 1.2Ghz one arriving tomorrow. I just need to
get another Slot-T and replace some caps on another 6163 and see how that
one goes. Who knows? I might get it to run at 133FSB for 1.6Ghz.
Unfortunately that'll put my AGP way out-of-spec but I can always run an old
PCI video card in it I guess, I'll only be using it for SETI at the moment.
Thses CPU's are almost too good to relegate to SETI boxes, I set up an
XP2000+ not long ago on an nForce2 board (with integrated graphics) and that
only got 150 CPU marks.
--
~misfit~

On Sun, 25 Jul 2004 23:55:13 -0400, P2B wrote:

IMHO the 1.0A is the best overclocking CPU since the 300A ....

(yep, mine tested & did with 1,8Vcore & loud cooling on another MoBo &
MatroxG400 1,6G /160Fsb (Mushin PC150cas2 ram) ...

But IMHO for avoiding so high FSBs (& Agp clock problems on BX)
for average OC-er is beter 1.1A .. to get higher final clock ...
(next is 1,3 ; the worst is 1,4 & than 1,2 ...)
--
Regards, SPAJKY ®
& visit my site @ http://www.spajky.vze.com
"Tualatin OC-ed / BX-Slot1 / inaudible setup!"
E-mail AntiSpam: remove ##

On Mon, 26 Jul 2004 18:11:51 +1200, "~misfit~"
wrote:
I have a 1.2Ghz one arriving tomorrow ..

not a good choice ...

Unfortunately that'll put my AGP way out-of-spec but I can always run an old
PCI video card in it I guess,.....

if having nVidia based card (Agp), try my tweak for high Agp clock
explained on my site (how I did it with mine...) ..
--
Regards, SPAJKY ®
& visit my site @ http://www.spajky.vze.com
"Tualatin OC-ed / BX-Slot1 / inaudible setup!"
E-mail AntiSpam: remove ##