P5W DH Overclocking Results with my 6300

Soldato
Joined
27 Jan 2003
Posts
5,947
Location
Chesterfield, UK
Greetings,

Recieved a P5W DH today to have a play with my nice clocking 6300. I was hoping to report some good things but alas I'm not impressed. First impressions of the board were , WOW nice box and look at all the extra's. Remote, wifi, this, that and the other. Nice heatpipe that looked like real copper. Wicked I thought some serious overclocking here. It even said designed for overclocking. Anyway I also recieved another oem 6300 so I set about testing. Lashed it up installed windows installed the lastest bios 901 or is it 910 and then tried to overclock. First stab was 400 which booted into windows and froze. So I upped the MCH volts to the middle setting and bingo nice and stable. I then went for 430, refused to boot. So I thought bad chip got my nice clocking 6300 which managed 510 and put that in again refused to boot at 430. Tried all sorts couldnt get it to boot at 430. Tried my new chip in my ds4 at 475 at default and bingo nice and stable so to conclude I'm not impressed with the P5W. Nice looking board but not a patch on the DS4. I have a 6600 arriving in the next week so I will try that on the P5W and DS4. At least my other chip is a good clocker
 
Soldato
Joined
29 Dec 2003
Posts
3,950
Location
UK
Seems to be a trend. The 2mb cache allendales clock well in the Gigabyte but not in the Asus and the 4mb Conroes clock well in the Asus but not in the Gigabyte.



E6300/6400 = Gygabite DS3/4 = Intel 965 Chipset

E6600/6700? = Asus P5W DH = Intel 975x Chipset
 
Last edited:
Soldato
OP
Joined
27 Jan 2003
Posts
5,947
Location
Chesterfield, UK
Devious said:
Seems to be a trend. The 2mb cache allendales clock well in the Gigabyte but not in the Asus and the 4mb Conroes clock well in the Asus but nor in the Gigabyte.



E6300/6400 = Gygabite DS3/4 = Intel 965 Chipset

E6600/6700? = Asus P5W DH = Intel 975x Chipset

Well I should be able to confirm that soon but I must admit I can't see why that should be the case unless the timings are different, interesting.

I thought they were all conroes with the 6300 just having a smaller cache. I'm sure I read that the allendales worked at a lower bus speed and had some of the optimizations switched off or not present. I also thought the allendales were coming out later this year. I suspect if someone were to pop the spreader off the chips they would be identical.
 
Soldato
Joined
29 Dec 2003
Posts
3,950
Location
UK
The Asgard said:
Well I should be able to confirm that soon but I must admit I can't see why that should be the case unless the timings are different, interesting.

I thought they were all conroes with the 6300 just having a smaller cache. I'm sure I read that the allendales worked at a lower bus speed and had some of the optimizations switched off or not present. I also thought the allendales were coming out later this year. I suspect if someone were to pop the spreader off the chips they would be identical.


They are identical really, the E6300's are conroes with half the cache disabled. I called them conroes until someone kept pulling me up on it and shoving a cpu-z shot in my face :p . I think the upcoming 4300's may be the true allendales and maybe cpu-z is reporting it wrong due to the cache size. Not certain though.
 
Soldato
OP
Joined
27 Jan 2003
Posts
5,947
Location
Chesterfield, UK
Devious said:
They are identical really, the E6300's are conroes with half the cache disabled. I called them conroes until someone kept pulling me up on it and shoving a cpu-z shot in my face :p . I think the upcoming 4300's may be the true allendales and maybe cpu-z is reporting it wrong due to the cache size. Not certain though.

I always assumed with CPU-Z that was a bug. Lol.
 
Soldato
OP
Joined
27 Jan 2003
Posts
5,947
Location
Chesterfield, UK
Iraklis F.C. said:
alright lol :D

i am anxious , my 6300 is on its way and cant wait to see what it will do in my bad axe.

No hassle m8.

Would be very interested with that myself. I have had my eye on a Badaxe for a while. I'm sure I read somewhere they have changed the clock chip and it apparantly nuked the overclocking abilities.

Keep us informed when you get it
 
Associate
Joined
18 Oct 2002
Posts
967
Location
Ipswich
Datamonkey said:
turn off hyper path3 in the chipset options mate ;)

held back my 6400 to 2.6ghz, now its running 3.4ghz.

Can anyone else confirm that this hss worked? I have placed one on order today, and will hopefully be giving it some oc loving'.

Cheers,

ICE
 
Soldato
Joined
29 Dec 2003
Posts
3,950
Location
UK
Vanilla_Ice said:
Sweet. What's the downside to turning it off?

ICE


This Asus board has tighter latencies compared to the other 975x boards and even more so compared to the 965 boards.

Turning Hyper path 3 off loosens some of this latency.

If you were running a low FSB then keep it on as you would get better performance than off, the problem is when we start getting up to the higher FSB, this needs turning off to be able to even boot the PC. The higher cpu clockspeed outweights the performance decrease of turning it off.

Even though this is turned off, it still has tighter latencies than the 965 motherboards which still wont allow it to reach the 500+ FSB of those.

These tighter latencies also can cause other problems with the ram, it seems above 360-380 FSB you cant run your mem above 1:1 so 4:5, 3:4 cant be used. Above around 430 FSB 1:1 cant be used, so you have to drop your mem to 4:3. If you can raise your FSB much above this with 4:3 then your cpu performance will overcome any reduction in mem bandwith.

Some people think the Asus doesnt clock well with E6600+ when it does, they just need to change there ram dividers.

With E6400 and E6300's you wont get as high clocks compared to the 965 boards due to this tighter latency.
 
Associate
Joined
18 Oct 2002
Posts
967
Location
Ipswich
Devious said:
This Asus board has tighter latencies compared to the other 975x boards and even more so compared to the 965 boards.

Turning Hyper path 3 off loosens some of this latency.

Thank you for explaining that. It reminds me of a setting on my old NF7-S.

So by benchmarking I should be able to work out where the higher FSB outperforms the tighter timings, yeah?

(sorry if i'm hijacking)

I currently plan to install a 2gb g.skill hz memory kit in with an E6600 cooled by a scythe ninja. Any guestimate as to what I am likely to reach?

I am worried my antec 450w neopower won't be upto the task (3 hdd's and 1 dvd-rw).

Opinions gratefully received.

Cheers,

ICE
 
Back
Top Bottom