Multiplier Question

[ffmedic12]

I've noticed in my bios that my multiplier is locked at 12. What I want to try to do is max out my core OC. Right now I think, my limitation is when I get my ram close to 250(500) I don't get a boot. If I loosen my timings then I can push it above the 250(500) mark, but I don't want to loosen my timings right now. So my OC is maxed right now at 2.94 and 245 on the ram. But I've noticed when in my bios if I select it to go with "optimized settings" it changes my multiplier to 8 which lowers my clock. But couldn't I use that setting, change core, volts and everything else to try to get my core clock up and keep my ram speed below the 250(500) mark? Does that make sense? I now some bios you have the option to change the multiplier, but not mine.

I'm new to OCing, so I'm just experimenting so I can learn. I'm happy with the OC I have now (see sig), but I just want to see... I'm anal.

 

[molsen]

what is your CPU's max OC? or are you OCing cpu and ram at the same time?

loosening timings will not affect performance very much. in fact, the increase in bus speed improves performance more than loosening timings hurts it.

if your having stability problems (ie not booting, crashes, etc.) consider raising your CPU voltage a tad if its not too high already...

temps ok?

lowering your multiplier will not affect memory bus speed. you have to run a memory divider for that...but that can hurt performance on Intel platforms, iirc. in fact, if you lower your multiplier, you'll have to raise your FSB higher to reach the same CPU speed (280 for example)...and that will put your RAM at 280MHz...

 

[ffmedic12]

O.k. Its all making sense now. I've been OC cpu and ram at the same time. My current OC is stable. I was just trying to push things a little and learn a few things while I'm at it.

 

[molsen]

hey as long as you're learning from it, it's a positive experience. oh yea, and your computer runs faster.

it's interesting to see how overclocks on RAM vs. CPU affects performance. i normally run 2.7ghz cpu, 225mhz ram.....but i'm at 2.53ghz cpu, 230mhz ram, and it feels a little snappier and responsive. my framrates in games havent fallen either... it could be all in my head....but i compared benches and one setting is faster at certain tasks than the other and vice versa...no real advantages. so i'm going to leave the clock speed lower because its stock voltage = cool temps.

and that seems to be the case with most overclocks. the difference between 2.4 and 2.6ghz may seem significant in a benchmark. but when you use the computer, you won't notice a difference. so striving for that last few MHz may be cool to reach just to see and so you can brag and/or put it in your sig..... but remember, cooler temps=stability and longer life

 

[ffmedic12]

Thats very interesting. I'm under the mindset that more is better, which sometimes that doesn't always apply, as I'm reminded by my wife daily. Maybe I will run some different tests at some diff. rates and see what happens. Right now, things are stable at 2.94/490 and temps under load haven't gotton higher than 36-38c. I did some similar tests on OCing my video. I was surprized to see that my cpu OC had little effect on my 3dmark05 scores. What gave me the biggest change in score was the video OC. So I guess I'll play around some more.

Thanks Molsen.