fsb overclocking on 64bit cpu s

[MuzTee]

i am about to make the leap to 64 bit,
can any one help me out on a few questions.

overclocking 64bit cpu s isnt as simple as 32bit i heard, i was wondering if you can raise the 200 fsb on these new 64 bit cpu s, looking at sites etc i only see the fx overclocked by the multiplier, i was hoping to get more than the 216 fsb limit i have seen on 32 bit cpu s.

is it possible to overclock 64 bit cpu 240 250 + fsb

i know about the agp lock is required, to oc the cpu on 64bit stuff, any one know the best baords and cpu combination to get 250 + fsb??

[BUFF]

overclocking 64bit cpu s isnt as simple as 32bit i heard, i was wondering if you can raise the 200 fsb on these new 64 bit cpu s, looking at sites etc i only see the fx overclocked by the multiplier, i was hoping to get more than the 216 fsb limit i have seen on 32 bit cpu s.

is it possible to overclock 64 bit cpu 240 250 + fsb

i know about the agp lock is required, to oc the cpu on 64bit stuff, any one know the best baords and cpu combination to get 250 + fsb??

It is a bit more complicated than with an XP - this isn't because it is 64 bit but because the memory controller is now in the CPU & it's all glued together by HyperTransport.
The FX cpus are fully unlocked up & down, all others are unlocked down from their default multi only.

It is more than quite possible to get 240-250HTT (the equivalent of fsb - it isn't really but it makes it simpler to think in that way) - with a decent chip, RAM, PSU, cooling, mobo with AGP/PCI locks etc. it is really quite attainable (easier to attain than on an XP although that was quite achievable too).

If you want to run at 240-250fsb & get a decent clockspeed too I would suggest the 3000+ 754 which gives you a 10x multiplier & below, so 2.4-2.5GHz. A good board could be Chaintech VNF3-250, ABIT KV8 Pro rev1.1, most nForce3 boards although the favourite for overclocking would be the DFI LanParty UT nF3 250Gb.

You might also want to look into the new Winchester core socket 939 CPUs which now start a lot cheaper than the older 939 cpus did.

[MuzTee]

I was looking at the 3500+ winchester 90 nm
would this also b fsb freindly?
also what 939 baord would you go for?

btw what is the difference between overclocking by multiplier or fsb frequency?
2.5 mhz can b obtained in these two different ways but would it actually b any difference
i mean should i jus try to get the highest cpu mhz wotever way possible?

basicly i want the highest mhz pc for the cheapest price. eg if the 3500 clocks to 2.5 with fsb tweeks surely its a better option than a fx55 @ 2.6 mhz @ £400 cheaper nearly the same speeds???

i hope i am making sense :X

how do i know how far these cpu s will go tweeking fsb fequencies eg 3800 only clock s 215 fsb but the 35 can go 233 both toping out at the 2.6 mark due to the cores.?

btw how r u running ur 3700 @?? wot multiplier by wot fsb fequencies?

[BUFF]

I was looking at the 3500+ winchester 90 nm
would this also b fsb freindly?
also what 939 baord would you go for?

Save the money & get a 3200+ http://www.madshrimps.be/?action=getarticle&articID=230

btw what is the difference between overclocking by multiplier or fsb frequency?
2.5 mhz can b obtained in these two different ways but would it actually b any difference
i mean should i jus try to get the highest cpu mhz wotever way possible?

If you take the same clockspeed e.g. 2.40GHZ then a system running 10x240 will be a bit quicker than one running 12x200 as the rest of the system gains a bit from the increased bus speed.
Usually it is a balancing act because you can't get your max CPU clockspeed at your max fsb.

basicly i want the highest mhz pc for the cheapest price. eg if the 3500 clocks to 2.5 with fsb tweeks surely its a better option than a fx55 @ 2.6 mhz @ £400 cheaper nearly the same speeds???

yes & an overclocked 3200+ is even better value

i hope i am making sense :X

how do i know how far these cpu s will go tweeking fsb fequencies eg 3800 only clock s 215 fsb but the 35 can go 233 both toping out at the 2.6 mark due to the cores.?

You were up until that
Don't forget that you can drop the multi to allow for a higher HTT.
Overclocking is always a lottery - you might get a brilliant result but then again it may hardly overclock at all. All you can do is try to maximise your chances by researching your component choices.

btw how r u running ur 3700 @?? wot multiplier by wot fsb fequencies?

Depends how I'm feeling - a lot of the time it just runs stock 12x200 but I haven't seriously tested it's limits yet although it can do 10x260. That's a project for another day

[MuzTee]

Many many thx buff this is a grwat help DD
jus 1 thing left wot 939 board should i go for with my 3200+?
i am ordering this chip now

[Stringer]

Many many thx buff this is a grwat help DD
jus 1 thing left wot 939 board should i go for with my 3200+?
i am ordering this chip now

ASUS A8N32-SLi nForce4 board. can take x2 chips but be warned they are getting as rare as rocking horse poo.

As for clocking, can clock on fsb but this has a habit of changing the memory clock as well. Some boards separate the two but i've not found this to work so you need to start pushing the voltages up to keep it stable.

Tbh you are best avoiding S939 now and going AM2.

[oralpain]

Athlon 64s do not have a frontside bus. The number you are changing to overclock an A64 is simply the external clock.

It works like this:

External clock * CPU Multiplier = CPU speed

CPU Speed / Memory divider = Memory speed

External clock * HT/LDT multiplier = hypertransport speed

There is no way to run memory syncronously on any K8 platform (except perhaps on very underclocked AM2 setups), so there is no further pentalty for using non-stock dividers. Two chips with the same final clock speed, the same memory clock speed, and the same timings, will run the same speed, regardless of the multipliers/dividers required to get there.

Also, the memory dividers listed in the BIOS for A64 boards are just rough estimates used to compare them to older, more standard ratios. There is no 1:1, or 5:4, or 3:2 setting. There are only whole number dividers of the full CPU speed that are used to get as close to these numbers without going over.

I am usinging the "166MHz", or "5:4" ratio on my A64 system, since my CPu is running at a 9x multiplier, this ratio is actually CPU:11, or the full cpu speed divided by 11 (DDR400 would be CPU:9). At stock external clock, this would workout to 164MHz, not 167. The differential gets larger as the CPU multiplier gets farther from 10.

[BUFF]

this is a 2 year old thread ...

[oralpain]

Haha, I did not see that...

Sorry.