1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.

AMD64 4000 Overclock - Results and Questions!

Discussion in 'Overclocking & Cooling' started by Heatsinked, 23 Jan 2006.

  1. Heatsinked

    Wise Guy

    Joined: 18 Oct 2002

    Posts: 1,938

    Location: Isle of Wight

    Hello everyone! I have been off work due to illness, giving me lots of time to try and overclock my new system! It's been an interesting experience, I think my motherboard is a bit quirky! Here are my specs:

    AMD Athlon64 4000 CPU (San Diego core)
    Gigabyte K8N Pro-Sli Motherboard
    G.Skill 1GB DDR LA PC4800 (2x512MB) Dual Channel Kit
    akasa 460W PSU

    I think that's all you need to know hardware wise. Let me quickly tell you a few things before the screenshots. In order to achieve the current stable overclock, I had to reduce my HT multipier to X2. Anything else above caused boot problems and BSOD's. I am using a divider to keep the memory at DDR400 standard, so I can run the tightest timings possible (including T1 CMD). Although no program reports my CMD setting as T1, I have forced the setting to T1 in the BIOS. Memory benchmarks taken before and after would suggest T1 is set, as SiSoftSandra reported quite a boost... VCore has also been increased to 1.55v.

    Well, here goes...

    CPU Info:

    [​IMG]

    Memory Info:

    [​IMG]

    If you look at the picture above, CPU-Z reports my memory to be operating at a frequency of 190.3. The bios however reports the memory to be operating at exactly 400. Therefore:

    190.3 x 2 = 380.6

    Close enough I guess, but is this normal? Does CPU-Z report the frequency more accurately? Or could it be the divider? Any further information on this would be greatly appreciated :)

    Anyway, I digress. Back to the screenshots... see next post.
     
    Last edited: 23 Jan 2006
  2. Heatsinked

    Wise Guy

    Joined: 18 Oct 2002

    Posts: 1,938

    Location: Isle of Wight

    SPD Info:

    [​IMG]

    I included this screen as part of my investigation due to the memory timings and settings not corresponding with what they should be. Is this an error within CPU-Z, or is my Motherboard not detecting the correct settings properly? Anyone know what they should be, in terms of TRC and DRAM Idle Timer? People with exactly the same ram seem to have their TRC at 128 clocks. Is this normal? My ram is supposedly capable of 5-2-2-2 at stock DDR400, so I have set that manualy and let SPD detect the rest. Would really like to know why it doesnt match up though.

    Sorry for the long post, only two more :D

    Memory Benchmark:

    [​IMG]

    If I run everything at stock with tightest memory timings, I get arround 5989MB/s in the above benchmark. It is interesting to note that despite having the memory running at stock DDR 400 frequency (according to the BIOS), I have lost a few hundred megabytes since the overclock. According to CPU-Z, my memory frequency is running at 380.6... arround 20mhz less than what the BIOS reports... If this is true, then I guess that explains why my SiSoftSandra score has dropped a bit. If loosing 20mhz can really make that much of a difference?

    So, in a nut shell: (for those who always skip to the bottom) :p

    BIOS Settings:

    HT WIDTH = 16 | 16
    1T/2T DRAM TIMING = 1T

    HT FREQUENCY RATIO = 2X
    CPU FREQUENCY = 242
    K8 CPU CLOCK RATIO = X11
    CPU/DDR CLOCK RATIO = 2/1.66 (divider I'm guessing)

    CAS = 2
    TRAS = 5T
    TRCD = 2T
    TRP = 2T
    TRRD = 2T
    TRC = 11T (SPD default setting - correct or not?)
    TRFC = 14T (SPD default setting - correct or not?)
    TRWT = 4T (SPD default setting - correct or not?)
    TWR = 3 bus clocks (SPD default setting - correct or not?)
    TWTR = 2 bus clocks (SPD default setting - correct or not?)
    TREF = 200mhz, 7.8ms (SPD default setting - correct or not?)
    READ PREAMBLE = 5.5ms (SPD default setting - correct or not?)
    ASYNC LATENCY = 7ns (SPD default setting - correct or not?)

    SPREAD SPECTRUM = DISABLED

    CPU VCORE = 1.55 (is this entirely safe?)

    Resulting Overclock:

    2664.2

    Thank you all for reading :)
     
    Last edited: 23 Jan 2006
  3. Heatsinked

    Wise Guy

    Joined: 18 Oct 2002

    Posts: 1,938

    Location: Isle of Wight

    Now prime95 stable for just over two hours :)
     
  4. Baker

    PermaBanned

    Joined: 27 Sep 2004

    Posts: 937

    Owned by my 3700 on stock voltage and cooling. Hoho.

    (although you obviously know what you're doing whereas I have no idea.)
     
  5. Heatsinked

    Wise Guy

    Joined: 18 Oct 2002

    Posts: 1,938

    Location: Isle of Wight

    Ok... what an informative post that was :rolleyes: :p

    Maybe someone else can try and answer some of my questions or maybe offer some constructive criticism?
     
  6. Baker

    PermaBanned

    Joined: 27 Sep 2004

    Posts: 937

    With regards to the CPU voltage, it is safe but will decrease the lifespan of your CPU.
     
  7. Heatsinked

    Wise Guy

    Joined: 18 Oct 2002

    Posts: 1,938

    Location: Isle of Wight

    No overclock is stable, not even 210 HT, unless I use a vcore of 1.55... am I missing something?

    Put everything back at stock now. Managed to get the CPU up to 2.7Ghz stable but I'm worried about breaking stuff :(

    It would appear that some people get great overclocks using this motherboard, some don't...
     
  8. IzaLearnin

    Gangster

    Joined: 9 Jun 2005

    Posts: 265

    Location: Yorkshire

    Your not getting much help here are you mate. Having had a 4000+ San Diego before this Opteron I can maybe help you along. Firstly you are a little confused with ddr speed and ldt settings but we can come back to that. What vdimm (memory voltage) are you using?
     
  9. Heatsinked

    Wise Guy

    Joined: 18 Oct 2002

    Posts: 1,938

    Location: Isle of Wight

    Thank you for trying to help :)

    Memory voltage is at default, since I'm not trying to push my ram past it's default operating speed, I didn't think it was necessary...

    I managed to hit 2.7Ghz but the HT multiplier still woulden't go higher than X2. VCORE was set to 1.55v and I was using the same divider as before, so the memory was only overclocked a little bit...

    I don't know. Seriously scratching my head here... wondering if it's worth it, as my system runs fast anyway. Just wish if I knew it was my motherboard causing me problems or perhaps my lack of overclocking skills / knowledge... although I thought I had it all sussed :p
     
  10. Heatsinked

    Wise Guy

    Joined: 18 Oct 2002

    Posts: 1,938

    Location: Isle of Wight

    Latest update:

    CPU is running at 2.7Ghz now but I had to whack the voltage up to 1.65 :eek:
    Although various software reports 1.616 volts... interesting. CPU temperature peaks at 40degc full load. Is that alright?

    I'm not using any dividers this time, HT multiplier is set to X2 and HT frequency is operating at 225.

    Memory timings are set to 2-3-3-8 1CMD 2-Way Bank Interleave. Using default voltage setting.

    Think i'll let it burn in for a while. Memtest ran for 2 hours with no problem, gotta love this G.Skill stuff! SiSoftSandra benchmark reports 6573MB/s :cool:

    HT multiplier won't budge from X2 though...
     
  11. Mana

    Mobster

    Joined: 8 Nov 2002

    Posts: 4,051

    Location: .earth

    drop the multiplier to 10 and up the htt?

    my winchester 3500 did 270x10 and it flew at that speed...

    shame my ballistix memory decided to die recently.
     
  12. Baker

    PermaBanned

    Joined: 27 Sep 2004

    Posts: 937

    More than. Once it starts getting between 55 and 60 is when you want to get worried.
     
  13. Heatsinked

    Wise Guy

    Joined: 18 Oct 2002

    Posts: 1,938

    Location: Isle of Wight

    Does raw HT speed really matter that much? I only increase it to increase the overclock of my CPU or RAM.
     
  14. Dirk

    Wise Guy

    Joined: 20 Dec 2005

    Posts: 1,930

  15. mctrials23

    Hitman

    Joined: 6 Jan 2005

    Posts: 722

    Location: colchester,essex

    mate im not sure whats going wrong here. You should be running at a minimum 4x ht as its supposed to be CPU fsb x ht = 1000 roughly.

    I would advise you to keep the 1T on the ram but increase the fsb on the ram as that will make it quicker. I cant really explain why you could need such high volts to get a 300mhz overclock.

    I wouldnt advise going over about 1.55 volts. Maybe you have a dud clocking core or maybe some other piece of hardware is causing the instability.
     
  16. sja360

    Mobster

    Joined: 28 Jul 2003

    Posts: 3,875

    Location: Dundee

    i found that some particular types of ram + cpu's dont perform well together, but this was when i had my ocz platinum eb pc3700 and a 3500 winchester.
    i'd try loosen up those ram timings even run 2t command rate, and then lower the multi and up the ht to see how high your fsb/ht can get.
    then reset the settings back then increase the multiplier and then up the ht with the ram timings still loose. it'll show your max frequency the chip can do.
     
  17. Chaos_Darklight

    Associate

    Joined: 9 Jan 2006

    Posts: 45

    Location: Chester, Cheshire

    Hey Heatskined, I have the exact same memory you do, I'be running mine at DD470 with the following set up...bear in mind my otherboard is a DFI Expert:

    VoltageDDR: 2.71
    Tcl: 2.5
    Trcd: 3
    Trp: 3
    Tras:6

    Trfc:12
    Trrd: 2 (Drop to 3 might help if you get errors in memtest86+)
    Twr:2
    Twrt:2
    Trwt:2
    Tref: 3072 (Refers Intervals) (Number of refresh cycles) (Lower to stable, but proformance loss)
    Twcl: 1T

    Bank Intervals: Enable
    Skew Control: 255+
    Drive Strength: 7 (Always when overclocking best stability)
    Date Strength: 4 (But try 2 to increase stability)
    Max Async: 7ns (8ns will stabalize abit more)
    Read Preamble: 5ns
    Idle Cyle: 256 cycles
    Dynamic Counter: Enable
    R/W Bypass: 16X
    Baypass Max: 7X

    I also have my CPU (same as yours) running at 2.82Ghz prime95 Stable 8 hours+ stable...This is done with a HTT of 235 X a Multi of 12 FSB is at X 4 and this works but like you i can't really go any higher...I want to get 3Ghz out of the chip...but i can't go any higher with my voltages on my motherboard i'm already on a Vcore of 1.525 and a DDRV of 2.71, the increases don't help at all past those numbers.

    We're in the same boat...i seriously reckon this particular chip doesn't like high HTT's becos i've even tried a low Multi like 9X 300 HTT for example which makes me a 2.6Ghz clock, but thats not stable i even tried getting a stock clock using a lower multi and a slightly higher HTT and the system is still not stable...well in prime95 anyway...in memtest86+ the memory always passes a good few hours, regardless if its running upto DDR550 settings above or DDR600 with a few more memory tweaks.

    Its a mistery to me...i can't solve it an i've been trying to for the last past week none stop.

    :mad: :mad: :mad: :mad: :p oh sorry for long post
     
    Last edited: 1 Feb 2006
  18. mysticsniper

    Sgarrista

    Joined: 1 May 2003

    Posts: 9,472

    AMD Athlon64 4000 CPU (San Diego core)
    DFI LanParty UT NF4 Ultra-D
    1Gb OCZ EL DDR PC5000 Dual Channel Platinum DFI nF4 Special
    Antec NeoPower 480W PSU



    [​IMG]

    You should be able to get the same settings as mine quite easily. I just ain't been bothered about pushing mine any further at the moment :)
     
    Last edited: 1 Feb 2006
  19. SpliffVortex

    Gangster

    Joined: 27 Mar 2005

    Posts: 294

    Location: Miami Fla

    We contact your boss allready and explain to him you were not that sick !
     
    Last edited: 1 Feb 2006
  20. SpliffVortex

    Gangster

    Joined: 27 Mar 2005

    Posts: 294

    Location: Miami Fla

    Since a bunch of you guys are not only good at OC but nice guys in general heres a question = In recent time the price of the 4000+ have drop ,mattter of fact is the same as the 3800+ venice when it was a rage 8 months ago . Then we have the 3700+ san diego and getting dirt cheap by the days. Some say the 4000+ with a little overclock is well a FX . of course pound for pound the 3700+ Sandy is hard to beat ,I have not been around in a while "mother is sick" . now that the 4000+ PRICES rival that of the Venice 3800+ what are your opinions lately? on the S - 4000+