okk...i still dont get the joke but...i started my computer...pressed F2...entered the bootup thing...at the beginning...but it didnt give me the option to change the stuff...so is there another simple way...to actually just make it 2.0 Ghz
add me on [email protected] PLEASE jack, we will discuss it from there...im gonna go now for like 3 hours...il be sitting on the couch with some red bull!
"simple way"? your altering the speeds various things run at and EVERY change you make affects other things. It's best you research things yourself so that you KNOW what your doing rather than following my advice.
I know about overclocking? Only really know about Socket 939 overclocking because thats what i needed to know about and so thats what i read into, however most of the basic principles make sense irrespective of socket.
I really think this is a bad idea, especially seeing as you'll now have to use windows based apps such as ClockGen where the chances of fecking up everything is MUCH higher.
add me on [email protected] PLEASE jack, we will discuss it from there...im gonna go now for like 3 hours...il be sitting on the couch with some red bull!
As i said....
You may also wish to temporarily loosen then tighten your timings, and play with the vCore. All while Prime stable testing it and watching the temperature. Oh yeah, and you'll need to set your HTT multiplier to 4x. And your PC might not ever be stable at 2 GHz due to a mini-ITX mobo and a dodgy CPU.
I'm not going to explain what any of that means so that YOU will have to find out so you can make sure that you know what your doing, it IS complicated. I wish i didn't have some idiot telling me that the first thing i had to do before overclocking my CPU was tightening all my timings to hell on my RAM, putting cheap Value RAM on Cas 2 rather than 3 and trying to work out why it was unstable as hell.
Just because i got a 40% overclock doesn't mean you will, i've got one of the best stepping 3700's ever made, my last CPU, an AMD 4000, wouldn't stabilize anything over a 15% overclock.
Run CPU-Z and post a screenshot of the pages, specifically the one on your CPU, the memory and the board.
I know you've said that you don't care if you blow it up, but what will you do when you've got no PC and your dad won't let you get a new one because you'll blow that one up too?
Rather than overclocking it and rendering it useless, why not just sell it? At least get some money out of it if you don't care about it.
Just, whatever you do. Don't come crying to us because we showed you how to blow up your computer.
Edit:
JakG, i'd remove the link to Clockgen, then test Harjun on the dangers of overclocking. So you know he understands, my guess is he'll just skip all those links and go straight for the Clockgen and crank it up.
Good point! If you don't 100% need the laptop (or at least the portability factor) you could sell it and build (you seem to want to learn more about PC's and hardware, building your own is a good way to start) a very nice PC ripe for overclocking, although my old PC is probably worth £565 in total (minus unnecessarily expensive water cooling system) and that is enough to play LFS at 1680*1050 with 4xAA and 40 FPS in a full grid, up to 120 when the pack spreads out. If you skimped you could build a PC that speed for £330
i was going to but i thought he's 13, he's old enough to make the decision to overclock it if he wants - if he blows it up, then he's old enough to take 100% of the responsibility.
You guys are forgetting the really juicy part. If he damages his laptop, he will no longer be posting on the forum! I say go for it harjun.
However I have to advise you not to do it. The 5%-10% performance increase is just not worth it, and remember AMDs are not as overclockable as Intels so you won't get very far before your screen freezes and you say to yourself "OH S***!!!!". If you want it to be faster you're very limited in terms of upgrades, but you can add more ram to it; it will go faster if you do.
here we go jack...i read all the stuff which you sent me...and im ready!...here is my pics of what you asked. and please tell me how i can get it to 1.94Ghz with Clockgen ...and what digits i need to enter...thanks jack...your my her!, apart from Redbull of course
No offence, but do you have a CLUE what your on about? my AMD is running on a 40% overclock, stable, and on the Opteron 165's ive seen 66% stable overclocks...
EDIT - Could you give the CPU some load and show the CPU page again please Harjun/
oh...ok...jack, i gotta go to bed now...its 11:00 here, see you mate! i hope your on tomorrow, i might be going silverstone tomorrow though..there is some classical le mans race going on...
Stock speeds for now. I don't have the need to overclock atm, plus I need the stability of no overclock for work etc. I have taken it to 3.2Ghz quite easily but put it back to standard as I really don't need the extra speed atm.
Just to clarify, I didn't mean overclocking itself isn't easy, I bought this CPU + mobo combo for a reason however overclocking a notebook is near impossible/useless.
40% clock speed increase, 40% memory speed increase - in CPU performance (measure by SuperPi) it's gone from 38 seconds at stock to 28 seconds at 3.07 GHz, DDR556 which works out as a 35% increase in clock speed. To say that ingame fps is a better measure is pointless as it could be limited by my graphics card.
I've overclocked because it was something i wanted to learn about, and i gave it a try. Originally i used the inbuilt "Ai Overclock" feature which gave me a massive vCore cooking my CPU. I got that crappy CPU (AMD 4000 - good CPU, but a rubbish overclocker) from 2.4 GHz to 2.75 GHz, my "target" was to hit the 2.8 GHz of the next model up, the FX57, which at the time was over £350. About 9 months after this my Dad bought an AMD 3700, i gave it a try and tried 2.8 GHz - booted up fine. As a joke i tried 3 GHz and it booted up fine, before eventually stabilising at 3.07 GHz, which i was very impressed with as its even faster than the FX57. I'd just like to point out i was VERY lucky with the CPU though, a lot of chips (like my old one...) won't do this. Shame that even with all this potential it's only worth £25 - wait this has nothing to do with what i'm talking about.
One thing to note - your motherboard (or at least the desktop board with the same chipset) only managed 251 FSB, and with your 8x Multiplier that means that if ClockGen can get the same amount out of the CPU (which it probably won't) then the most you'll get out of that CPU is theoretically 251*8 = 2008 MHz
Am i the only one who doubts he actually read that stuff?
If you've really read the articles you should know what to do now.
AMD's aren't as overclockable, but percentage wise they are, and seeing as you can't compare AMD and Intels on GHz alone, percentage is the only logical way to do it.
90 nm AMD's tend to top out at 3-3.1 GHz, wheras the Netburst Intels were good for 8 GHz (as proved by "Team Italy" getting one to 8.1 GHz), if not necessarily stable at that speed - the newer 65 nm Core 2 Duo's can do up to 4 GHz stably, with 5.5 GHz+ unstably, while the new 65 nm AMD's are looking at 3.6 GHz max stably.
Ah, this thread is making me want to click buy on the E2160/Asus P5K order so i can go for a 80% overclock
What everyone has been saying is perfectly right, harjun, overclocking a laptop is a surefire way of killing it. My advice is simple: DON'T BOTHER!
As a side note: Have you actually looked at the size of the fans laptops use? They're barely enough to keep them operating at stock speeds. To try and get any more speed out of a CPU that's already on the brink of overheating is silly.
You should know what to do, but i think you'll need a 234+ FSB to achieve this. You'll also need other things like dividers, but after reading all these guides you should be well versed in that stuff.