Some RAM ocing trouble

[blockers]

Hi.
I have:
Abit NF7-S (v2.0)
xp1700 tbred (1.6v, good clocker)
2x256mb sammy pc2700.

This RAM has been to 200fsb in a friends computer, however i put my computer to 10x200fsb (as my friend suggested.) and it doesnt boot, at 190 it boots, but after doing something, not even that intense for the RAM it gets BSOD, and says physical dump of memory. At 180 it happens as well. This is at both 2.7v, and 2.8v (memory) and 1.7v (CPU.) The divider is 3:3

Is there anything i can do to get this RAM runnning at 200fsb?

Thanks
Will

[Austin]

TBH 200/400FSB is overkill really, perf gains over 166/333FSB aren't that significant and I doubt there would any perf loss in using 190/380FSB vs 200/400FSB at all. So if you can't hit 200/400FSB don't sweat it, you are asking a lot of PC2700 even if it manages it in another mobo ... the nForce2 may simply use it in a faster or more efficient way. Anyway certainly check RAM timings (higher should enable a higher mhz speed) and there are a few other options to 'slow' your RAM down so you can run a faster amount of mhz.

[dgr]

austin@ he wants to OC his pc, so his RAM needs to run faster surely? Surely everyone wants to get the largest STABLE oc possible?

200 is 5% faster than 190. if he needs that 5%...

dgr

[Austin]

He has NF7-S v2.0 so is not limited at all in o/c'ing options. It does make sense to run the fastest FSB and RAM as you can (stable) but certainly not worth spending extensive time and effort or cash (better RAM etc) on that last 5% as it's unlikely to gain you even 1% extra perf anyway. Better to use the max stable FSB o/c (RAM is surely limiting it) and then bump up the multiplier ... NF7-S v2.0 understands the 5th FID bit so you can have multipliers from 5.5x to not only 13x but 22x+ too.

[dgr]

excellent. btw i do agree that fsb (even clock speed) isn’t everything.

[KVandal]

as Austin says in first post, you have tried dropping the RAM timings, yes? If not then do so.

[blockers]

Thanks for all the replys guys...
The RAM was set 'By SPD' so they were ultra slow. and it still wouldnt get near 200fsb.

I just increased the multiplier a bit to 12.5 so its atbou 2085mhz or something. And i found out that the vcore can go to 2.3 or something ridiculas

What do people think is better fsb speed, or multiplier?

Will

[Austin]

If the CPU is kept at the same speed FSB is better certainly, it's just many people get carried away ... Durons don't need 400FSB for example, the Athlons up to XP2000+ hardly benefit at all from 333FSB and are almost as fast at 266FSB. So FSB is better so long as it doesn't hinder stability and CPU speed stays the same. However if you found you could run a faster CPU with a slightly lower FSB (eg 380FSB vs 400FSB) then that would generally be the better move, esp if the FSB is already mroe than is needed for practically optimal perf.

1.8v is high enough, more than ... esp for TbredB and Barton which use much lower vcores by default. Be careful as uppin ghtr evoltage seriously increases temps, stress and increases the chance long term damage (inc killing the CPU).

[Agent]

What BIOS are you on ?
The latest BIOS for the NF7-S hinders overclocking compared to previous versions.