[gentoo-user] Overclocking CPU causes segmentation fault

[gentoo-user] Overclocking CPU causes segmentation fault

[Nilesh Govindrajan]

So I have this old E2180 processor and no money as of now to buy a new
rig :P
I'm trying to overclock my CPU using BIOS host clock control and
everything is fine at 2.6 Ghz up to bootloader.

Kernel segfaults. Any idea why? I'm running pf-kernel 3.7.2 and it
doesn't work with vanilla kernel either.

Intel MCE is disabled in kernel configuration.


-- 
Nilesh Govindarajan
http://nileshgr.com

Re: [gentoo-user] Overclocking CPU causes segmentation fault

[Helmut Jarausch]

On 01/22/2013 08:41:14 AM, Nilesh Govindrajan wrote:
> So I have this old E2180 processor and no money as of now to buy a new
> rig :P
> I'm trying to overclock my CPU using BIOS host clock control and
> everything is fine at 2.6 Ghz up to bootloader.
> 
> Kernel segfaults. Any idea why? I'm running pf-kernel 3.7.2 and it
> doesn't work with vanilla kernel either.
> 
> Intel MCE is disabled in kernel configuration.
> 
Most probably you get memory errors. Try to run memtest which doesn't
need a running system.

Helmut.

[gentoo-user] Re: Overclocking CPU causes segmentation fault

[Nikos Chantziaras]

On 22/01/13 09:41, Nilesh Govindrajan wrote:
> So I have this old E2180 processor and no money as of now to buy a new
> rig :P
> I'm trying to overclock my CPU using BIOS host clock control and
> everything is fine at 2.6 Ghz up to bootloader.
>
> Kernel segfaults. Any idea why? I'm running pf-kernel 3.7.2 and it
> doesn't work with vanilla kernel either.
>
> Intel MCE is disabled in kernel configuration.

When you raise the "host clock", which is the FSB, you are also raising 
the frequency of your RAM.  So make sure you select a lower FSB:DRAM 
ratio in your BIOS.  To begin with, set it to 1:1.

Also, if you only have the stock CPU cooler that came with it, you won't 
be able to actually get a stable overclock.  Your CPU's stock frequency 
is 2GHz.  Without a better cooler, you might get it to 2.2 or 2.3 maybe. 
  But 2.6?  That's pretty optimistic.  I don't think it'll work in the 
long run, unless you happen to have picked a good chip that can be 
overclocked without raising the VCore.

But first, solve the RAM problem by lowering the FSB:DRAM ratio.

Re: [gentoo-user] Re: Overclocking CPU causes segmentation fault

[Nilesh Govindrajan]

On Tuesday 22 January 2013 03:13:01 PM IST, Nikos Chantziaras wrote:
> On 22/01/13 09:41, Nilesh Govindrajan wrote:
>> So I have this old E2180 processor and no money as of now to buy a new
>> rig :P
>> I'm trying to overclock my CPU using BIOS host clock control and
>> everything is fine at 2.6 Ghz up to bootloader.
>>
>> Kernel segfaults. Any idea why? I'm running pf-kernel 3.7.2 and it
>> doesn't work with vanilla kernel either.
>>
>> Intel MCE is disabled in kernel configuration.
>
> When you raise the "host clock", which is the FSB, you are also
> raising the frequency of your RAM.  So make sure you select a lower
> FSB:DRAM ratio in your BIOS.  To begin with, set it to 1:1.
>
> Also, if you only have the stock CPU cooler that came with it, you
> won't be able to actually get a stable overclock.  Your CPU's stock
> frequency is 2GHz.  Without a better cooler, you might get it to 2.2
> or 2.3 maybe.  But 2.6?  That's pretty optimistic.  I don't think
> it'll work in the long run, unless you happen to have picked a good
> chip that can be overclocked without raising the VCore.
>
> But first, solve the RAM problem by lowering the FSB:DRAM ratio.
>
>

I don't get even 2.1 with the stock cooler. Temperature easily goes 
above 75-80 (spec say high temp is 86) on the prime95 test. Quite easy 
to cook it considering that I'm a Gentoo user :D
Not really worth that. Thanks for replies.

--
Nilesh Govindarajan
http://nileshgr.com

[gentoo-user] Re: Overclocking CPU causes segmentation fault

[Nikos Chantziaras]

On 22/01/13 13:14, Nilesh Govindrajan wrote:
> On Tuesday 22 January 2013 03:13:01 PM IST, Nikos Chantziaras wrote:
>> On 22/01/13 09:41, Nilesh Govindrajan wrote:
>>> So I have this old E2180 processor and no money as of now to buy a new
>>> rig :P
>>> I'm trying to overclock my CPU using BIOS host clock control and
>>> everything is fine at 2.6 Ghz up to bootloader.
>>>
>>> Kernel segfaults. Any idea why? I'm running pf-kernel 3.7.2 and it
>>> doesn't work with vanilla kernel either.
>>>
>>> Intel MCE is disabled in kernel configuration.
>>
>> When you raise the "host clock", which is the FSB, you are also
>> raising the frequency of your RAM.  So make sure you select a lower
>> FSB:DRAM ratio in your BIOS.  To begin with, set it to 1:1.
>>
>> Also, if you only have the stock CPU cooler that came with it, you
>> won't be able to actually get a stable overclock.  Your CPU's stock
>> frequency is 2GHz.  Without a better cooler, you might get it to 2.2
>> or 2.3 maybe.  But 2.6?  That's pretty optimistic.  I don't think
>> it'll work in the long run, unless you happen to have picked a good
>> chip that can be overclocked without raising the VCore.
>>
>> But first, solve the RAM problem by lowering the FSB:DRAM ratio.
>>
>>
>
> I don't get even 2.1 with the stock cooler. Temperature easily goes
> above 75-80 (spec say high temp is 86) on the prime95 test. Quite easy
> to cook it considering that I'm a Gentoo user :D
> Not really worth that. Thanks for replies.

It really worth trying *lowering* VCore instead of raising it. If your 
chip happens to be very good and deal with this without causing 
instabilities, this will result in a big drop of temperatures.  I did 
this on a C2D CPU in the past.  I lowered VCore and raised FSB.  I ended 
up with a good performance boost *and* lower temperatures. 
Unfortunately, not all chips behave the same.  It's hit and miss.

Re: [gentoo-user] Re: Overclocking CPU causes segmentation fault

[Nilesh Govindrajan]

On Tuesday 22 January 2013 05:13:21 PM IST, Nikos Chantziaras wrote:
> On 22/01/13 13:14, Nilesh Govindrajan wrote:
>> On Tuesday 22 January 2013 03:13:01 PM IST, Nikos Chantziaras wrote:
>>> On 22/01/13 09:41, Nilesh Govindrajan wrote:
>>>> So I have this old E2180 processor and no money as of now to buy a new
>>>> rig :P
>>>> I'm trying to overclock my CPU using BIOS host clock control and
>>>> everything is fine at 2.6 Ghz up to bootloader.
>>>>
>>>> Kernel segfaults. Any idea why? I'm running pf-kernel 3.7.2 and it
>>>> doesn't work with vanilla kernel either.
>>>>
>>>> Intel MCE is disabled in kernel configuration.
>>>
>>> When you raise the "host clock", which is the FSB, you are also
>>> raising the frequency of your RAM.  So make sure you select a lower
>>> FSB:DRAM ratio in your BIOS.  To begin with, set it to 1:1.
>>>
>>> Also, if you only have the stock CPU cooler that came with it, you
>>> won't be able to actually get a stable overclock.  Your CPU's stock
>>> frequency is 2GHz.  Without a better cooler, you might get it to 2.2
>>> or 2.3 maybe.  But 2.6?  That's pretty optimistic.  I don't think
>>> it'll work in the long run, unless you happen to have picked a good
>>> chip that can be overclocked without raising the VCore.
>>>
>>> But first, solve the RAM problem by lowering the FSB:DRAM ratio.
>>>
>>>
>>
>> I don't get even 2.1 with the stock cooler. Temperature easily goes
>> above 75-80 (spec say high temp is 86) on the prime95 test. Quite easy
>> to cook it considering that I'm a Gentoo user :D
>> Not really worth that. Thanks for replies.
>
> It really worth trying *lowering* VCore instead of raising it. If your
> chip happens to be very good and deal with this without causing
> instabilities, this will result in a big drop of temperatures.  I did
> this on a C2D CPU in the past.  I lowered VCore and raised FSB.  I
> ended up with a good performance boost *and* lower temperatures.
> Unfortunately, not all chips behave the same.  It's hit and miss.
>
>
>

Now that sounds like a deal. The normal VCore for my CPU is 1.325V..

--
Nilesh Govindarajan
http://nileshgr.com

Re: [gentoo-user] Re: Overclocking CPU causes segmentation fault

[Nilesh Govindrajan]

On Tuesday 22 January 2013 05:16:23 PM IST, Nilesh Govindrajan wrote:
> On Tuesday 22 January 2013 05:13:21 PM IST, Nikos Chantziaras wrote:
>> On 22/01/13 13:14, Nilesh Govindrajan wrote:
>>> On Tuesday 22 January 2013 03:13:01 PM IST, Nikos Chantziaras wrote:
>>>> On 22/01/13 09:41, Nilesh Govindrajan wrote:
>>>>> So I have this old E2180 processor and no money as of now to buy a new
>>>>> rig :P
>>>>> I'm trying to overclock my CPU using BIOS host clock control and
>>>>> everything is fine at 2.6 Ghz up to bootloader.
>>>>>
>>>>> Kernel segfaults. Any idea why? I'm running pf-kernel 3.7.2 and it
>>>>> doesn't work with vanilla kernel either.
>>>>>
>>>>> Intel MCE is disabled in kernel configuration.
>>>>
>>>> When you raise the "host clock", which is the FSB, you are also
>>>> raising the frequency of your RAM.  So make sure you select a lower
>>>> FSB:DRAM ratio in your BIOS.  To begin with, set it to 1:1.
>>>>
>>>> Also, if you only have the stock CPU cooler that came with it, you
>>>> won't be able to actually get a stable overclock.  Your CPU's stock
>>>> frequency is 2GHz.  Without a better cooler, you might get it to 2.2
>>>> or 2.3 maybe.  But 2.6?  That's pretty optimistic.  I don't think
>>>> it'll work in the long run, unless you happen to have picked a good
>>>> chip that can be overclocked without raising the VCore.
>>>>
>>>> But first, solve the RAM problem by lowering the FSB:DRAM ratio.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>> I don't get even 2.1 with the stock cooler. Temperature easily goes
>>> above 75-80 (spec say high temp is 86) on the prime95 test. Quite easy
>>> to cook it considering that I'm a Gentoo user :D
>>> Not really worth that. Thanks for replies.
>>
>> It really worth trying *lowering* VCore instead of raising it. If your
>> chip happens to be very good and deal with this without causing
>> instabilities, this will result in a big drop of temperatures.  I did
>> this on a C2D CPU in the past.  I lowered VCore and raised FSB.  I
>> ended up with a good performance boost *and* lower temperatures.
>> Unfortunately, not all chips behave the same.  It's hit and miss.
>>
>>
>>
>
> Now that sounds like a deal. The normal VCore for my CPU is 1.325V..
>
> --
> Nilesh Govindarajan
> http://nileshgr.com

Wasn't able to get much far with undervolting, it works at 1.3125V @ 
2.40 Ghz.
Temperature doesn't cross 75C.

Thanks a lot man! :-)

--
Nilesh Govindarajan
http://nileshgr.com

Re: [gentoo-user] Overclocking CPU causes segmentation fault

[Volker Armin Hemmann]

Am 22.01.2013 08:41, schrieb Nilesh Govindrajan:
> So I have this old E2180 processor and no money as of now to buy a new
> rig :P
> I'm trying to overclock my CPU using BIOS host clock control and
> everything is fine at 2.6 Ghz up to bootloader.
>
> Kernel segfaults. Any idea why? I'm running pf-kernel 3.7.2 and it
> doesn't work with vanilla kernel either.
>
> Intel MCE is disabled in kernel configuration.
>
>
and now you know why overclocking is stupid. (disabling mce is stupid
too btw).

Before there are segfaults there are silent data corruption errors. The
file you downloaded and saved to the disk? Damaged - and you won't
know...  or you will, when those errors add up, turning precious data
into binary garbage.

Only overclock if there is nothing of worth on your computer - and
nothing of worth done with it. But in that case - why use it in the
first place?

Don't be stupid. Don't overvlock.

Re: [gentoo-user] Overclocking CPU causes segmentation fault

[Nilesh Govindrajan]

On Wednesday 23 January 2013 12:05:45 AM IST, Volker Armin Hemmann 
wrote:
> Am 22.01.2013 08:41, schrieb Nilesh Govindrajan:
>> So I have this old E2180 processor and no money as of now to buy a new
>> rig :P
>> I'm trying to overclock my CPU using BIOS host clock control and
>> everything is fine at 2.6 Ghz up to bootloader.
>>
>> Kernel segfaults. Any idea why? I'm running pf-kernel 3.7.2 and it
>> doesn't work with vanilla kernel either.
>>
>> Intel MCE is disabled in kernel configuration.
>>
>>
> and now you know why overclocking is stupid. (disabling mce is stupid
> too btw).
>
> Before there are segfaults there are silent data corruption errors. The
> file you downloaded and saved to the disk? Damaged - and you won't
> know...  or you will, when those errors add up, turning precious data
> into binary garbage.
>
> Only overclock if there is nothing of worth on your computer - and
> nothing of worth done with it. But in that case - why use it in the
> first place?
>
> Don't be stupid. Don't overvlock.
>

Enabled MCE back after realising it's RAM issue. Anyway, it's too much 
work running torture tests. Back to safe levels.

--
Nilesh Govindarajan
http://nileshgr.com

Re: [gentoo-user] Overclocking CPU causes segmentation fault

[Dale]

Nilesh Govindrajan wrote:
> On Wednesday 23 January 2013 12:05:45 AM IST, Volker Armin Hemmann 
> wrote:
>> Am 22.01.2013 08:41, schrieb Nilesh Govindrajan:
>>> So I have this old E2180 processor and no money as of now to buy a new
>>> rig :P
>>> I'm trying to overclock my CPU using BIOS host clock control and
>>> everything is fine at 2.6 Ghz up to bootloader.
>>>
>>> Kernel segfaults. Any idea why? I'm running pf-kernel 3.7.2 and it
>>> doesn't work with vanilla kernel either.
>>>
>>> Intel MCE is disabled in kernel configuration.
>>>
>>>
>> and now you know why overclocking is stupid. (disabling mce is stupid
>> too btw).
>>
>> Before there are segfaults there are silent data corruption errors. The
>> file you downloaded and saved to the disk? Damaged - and you won't
>> know...  or you will, when those errors add up, turning precious data
>> into binary garbage.
>>
>> Only overclock if there is nothing of worth on your computer - and
>> nothing of worth done with it. But in that case - why use it in the
>> first place?
>>
>> Don't be stupid. Don't overvlock.
>>
> Enabled MCE back after realising it's RAM issue. Anyway, it's too much 
> work running torture tests. Back to safe levels.
>
> --
> Nilesh Govindarajan
> http://nileshgr.com
>
>


I tired overclocking once a good while back.  It just wasn't worth it. 
By the time you fix everything that gets broke, it just isn't worth that
extra single digit percentage point of gain.  You run the risk of having
memory issues which can lead to bad data on the hard drive.  Then that
leads to more issues and this just keeps going in circles.  At some
point, it is going to fail and you could loose data that you don't
really want to loose.  There is also the heat issue as well. 

Also, I used to run foldingathome.  It does not do well with
overclocking.  It will error out pretty quick.  I tried this on a Abit
NF7 v2 mobo.  At that time, they were pretty much the king of
overclocking.  I bought everything intending to overclock but it wasn't
worth it.  I had a HUGE copper heat sink on that CPU.  I wonder what the
scrap value of that thing is?  lol 

Save up, buy a faster CPU or just do a upgrade.  Make a router out of
the older box, if it doesn't pull to much power. 

Dale

:-)  :-) 

-- 
I am only responsible for what I said ... Not for what you understood or how you interpreted my words!

[gentoo-user] Re: Overclocking CPU causes segmentation fault

[Nikos Chantziaras]

On 23/01/13 03:55, Dale wrote:
>[...]
> I tired overclocking once a good while back.  It just wasn't worth it.

I've been running a Core 2 Duo from 2.4Ghz to 3.4Ghz for over three 
years.  Instead of a new CPU, I only bought a €30 cooler.

Oh, it *was* totally worth it.  Mainly for games, where the performance 
difference was really dramatic.

Re: [gentoo-user] Re: Overclocking CPU causes segmentation fault

[Dale]

Nikos Chantziaras wrote:
> On 23/01/13 03:55, Dale wrote:
>> [...]
>> I tired overclocking once a good while back.  It just wasn't worth it.
>
> I've been running a Core 2 Duo from 2.4Ghz to 3.4Ghz for over three
> years.  Instead of a new CPU, I only bought a €30 cooler.
>
> Oh, it *was* totally worth it.  Mainly for games, where the
> performance difference was really dramatic.
>
>
>

I doubt most get that lucky tho.  After all, overclocking is mostly
luck.  Some CPU's won't overclock that much long term because of either
the CPU itself or some other component that can't handle the increase.
When you overclock, you are searching for that weak link.  Most of the
time, you find that weak link. 

Dale

:-)  :-) 

-- 
I am only responsible for what I said ... Not for what you understood or how you interpreted my words!

[gentoo-user] Re: Overclocking CPU causes segmentation fault

[Nikos Chantziaras]

On 23/01/13 14:09, Dale wrote:
> Nikos Chantziaras wrote:
>> On 23/01/13 03:55, Dale wrote:
>>> [...]
>>> I tired overclocking once a good while back.  It just wasn't worth it.
>>
>> I've been running a Core 2 Duo from 2.4Ghz to 3.4Ghz for over three
>> years.  Instead of a new CPU, I only bought a €30 cooler.
>>
>> Oh, it *was* totally worth it.  Mainly for games, where the
>> performance difference was really dramatic.
>>
>
> I doubt most get that lucky tho.  After all, overclocking is mostly
> luck.  Some CPU's won't overclock that much long term because of either
> the CPU itself or some other component that can't handle the increase.
> When you overclock, you are searching for that weak link.  Most of the
> time, you find that weak link.

In my experience, most of the time you can overclock.  The issue is with 
the user not knowing exactly how to do it.  You need to understand a few 
things and how they affect each other.  It's not just a knob you can turn.

Re: [gentoo-user] Re: Overclocking CPU causes segmentation fault

[Nilesh Govindrajan]

On Wednesday 23 January 2013 07:52:03 PM IST, Nikos Chantziaras wrote:
> On 23/01/13 14:09, Dale wrote:
>> Nikos Chantziaras wrote:
>>> On 23/01/13 03:55, Dale wrote:
>>>> [...]
>>>> I tired overclocking once a good while back.  It just wasn't worth it.
>>>
>>> I've been running a Core 2 Duo from 2.4Ghz to 3.4Ghz for over three
>>> years.  Instead of a new CPU, I only bought a €30 cooler.
>>>
>>> Oh, it *was* totally worth it.  Mainly for games, where the
>>> performance difference was really dramatic.
>>>
>>
>> I doubt most get that lucky tho.  After all, overclocking is mostly
>> luck.  Some CPU's won't overclock that much long term because of either
>> the CPU itself or some other component that can't handle the increase.
>> When you overclock, you are searching for that weak link.  Most of the
>> time, you find that weak link.
>
> In my experience, most of the time you can overclock.  The issue is
> with the user not knowing exactly how to do it.  You need to
> understand a few things and how they affect each other.  It's not just
> a knob you can turn.
>
>

That pretty much applies to me. I don't know much about hardware stuff.
Regarding your 1 Ghz overclock, you probably have good components in 
terms of RAM & SMPS.
When I bought this rig in 2008, I knew nothing about good components, 
blindly trusted local vendor... also internet shopping wasn't advanced 
here.
So pretty much substandard components.

Now that I know stuff, I'm thinking of assembling my own AMD FX8350 rig 
soon by buying components from the web.
So, let's close this topic  :-)

--
Nilesh Govindarajan
http://nileshgr.com

[gentoo-user] Re: Overclocking CPU causes segmentation fault

[Nikos Chantziaras]

On 23/01/13 17:09, Nilesh Govindrajan wrote:
> On Wednesday 23 January 2013 07:52:03 PM IST, Nikos Chantziaras wrote:
>> [...]
>> In my experience, most of the time you can overclock.  The issue is
>> with the user not knowing exactly how to do it.  You need to
>> understand a few things and how they affect each other.  It's not just
>> a knob you can turn.
>
> That pretty much applies to me. I don't know much about hardware stuff.
> Regarding your 1 Ghz overclock, you probably have good components in
> terms of RAM & SMPS.
> When I bought this rig in 2008, I knew nothing about good components,
> blindly trusted local vendor... also internet shopping wasn't advanced
> here.
> So pretty much substandard components.

The part that's really important is the mainboard.  RAM doesn't matter. 
  In my case, I had pretty basic 800MHz DDR2 RAM.  Raising the FSB would 
bring it above that, so I changed the DRAM ratio to 1:1, and the RAM 
then ran at only 600Mhz.

That was the starting point to rule out RAM problems.  After that, I 
raised FSB but kept the VCore constant until I hit the first 
instabilities.  When that happened, I raised VCore a bit.  Rinse and 
repeat, until the VCore was still below the maximum recommendation by 
Intel.  That happened at 3.4GHz (378MHz FSB * 9 CPU multiplier = 3402MHz 
CPU clock.)  The E6600 CPU I got was an average sample.  Others were 
running it at 3.6GHz (or even higher with water cooling.)

This was a process that took about 3 days to complete (needs a lot of 
stability testing.)  The good thing about those older CPUs was that the 
performance boost I got by OCing wasn't just scaling linearly with the 
CPU frequency.  It was scaling *better* than that, because raising the 
FSB also made the mainboard itself perform better and with lower latencies.


> Now that I know stuff, I'm thinking of assembling my own AMD FX8350 rig
> soon by buying components from the web.
> So, let's close this topic  :-)

As I said above, the mainboard is really the only important factor.

Re: [gentoo-user] Re: Overclocking CPU causes segmentation fault

[Bruce Hill]

On Wed, Jan 23, 2013 at 05:35:09PM +0200, Nikos Chantziaras wrote:
> 
> The part that's really important is the mainboard.  RAM doesn't matter. 
> 
> As I said above, the mainboard is really the only important factor.

Though I've not overclocked in better than a decade, I disagree with your
statement that RAM doesn't matter. Especially now, since there is a plethora
of junk RAM on the market.

Just my 2 cents.
-- 
Happy Penguin Computers               >')
126 Fenco Drive                       ( \
Tupelo, MS 38801                       ^^
support@happypenguincomputers.com
662-269-2706 662-205-6424
http://happypenguincomputers.com/

Don't top-post: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Top_post#Top-posting

[gentoo-user] Re: Overclocking CPU causes segmentation fault

[Nikos Chantziaras]

On 23/01/13 18:22, Bruce Hill wrote:
> On Wed, Jan 23, 2013 at 05:35:09PM +0200, Nikos Chantziaras wrote:
>>
>> The part that's really important is the mainboard.  RAM doesn't matter.
>>
>> As I said above, the mainboard is really the only important factor.
>
> Though I've not overclocked in better than a decade, I disagree with your
> statement that RAM doesn't matter. Especially now, since there is a plethora
> of junk RAM on the market.
>
> Just my 2 cents.

It doesn't matter because you don't overclock the RAM (in fact I ended 
up underclocking it slightly.)  Which you can do if the mainboard allows 
you to set DRAM speeds.

Re: [gentoo-user] Re: Overclocking CPU causes segmentation fault

[Volker Armin Hemmann]

Am 23.01.2013 09:21, schrieb Nikos Chantziaras:
> On 23/01/13 03:55, Dale wrote:
>> [...]
>> I tired overclocking once a good while back.  It just wasn't worth it.
>
> I've been running a Core 2 Duo from 2.4Ghz to 3.4Ghz for over three
> years.  Instead of a new CPU, I only bought a €30 cooler.
>
> Oh, it *was* totally worth it.  Mainly for games, where the
> performance difference was really dramatic.
>
>
>

yeah and all those files with bit flips (not a problem with films or
pics or mp3s....) you don't know about were totally worth it...

Re: [gentoo-user] Re: Overclocking CPU causes segmentation fault

[Volker Armin Hemmann]

Am 23.01.2013 16:35, schrieb Nikos Chantziaras:
> On 23/01/13 17:09, Nilesh Govindrajan wrote:
>> On Wednesday 23 January 2013 07:52:03 PM IST, Nikos Chantziaras wrote:
>>> [...]
>>> In my experience, most of the time you can overclock.  The issue is
>>> with the user not knowing exactly how to do it.  You need to
>>> understand a few things and how they affect each other.  It's not just
>>> a knob you can turn.
>>
>> That pretty much applies to me. I don't know much about hardware stuff.
>> Regarding your 1 Ghz overclock, you probably have good components in
>> terms of RAM & SMPS.
>> When I bought this rig in 2008, I knew nothing about good components,
>> blindly trusted local vendor... also internet shopping wasn't advanced
>> here.
>> So pretty much substandard components.
>
> The part that's really important is the mainboard.  RAM doesn't
> matter.  In my case, I had pretty basic 800MHz DDR2 RAM.  Raising the
> FSB would bring it above that, so I changed the DRAM ratio to 1:1, and
> the RAM then ran at only 600Mhz.
>
> That was the starting point to rule out RAM problems.  After that, I
> raised FSB but kept the VCore constant until I hit the first
> instabilities.  When that happened, I raised VCore a bit.  Rinse and
> repeat, until the VCore was still below the maximum recommendation by
> Intel.  That happened at 3.4GHz (378MHz FSB * 9 CPU multiplier =
> 3402MHz CPU clock.)  The E6600 CPU I got was an average sample. 
> Others were running it at 3.6GHz (or even higher with water cooling.)
>
> This was a process that took about 3 days to complete (needs a lot of
> stability testing.)  The good thing about those older CPUs was that
> the performance boost I got by OCing wasn't just scaling linearly with
> the CPU frequency.  It was scaling *better* than that, because raising
> the FSB also made the mainboard itself perform better and with lower
> latencies.
>
and here we are - the point where the suspension of disbelief ends.

All you may have gained you threw away with the slower ram - and you are
trying to tell us that your rig was faster?

You do know that with today's CPUs the CPU is not the bottleneck - the
slow as molasses, no speed bump for 10 years ram is.

(just look at the internal clock rate of dram chips - and you realize
that ddr1-3 are pretty much the same crap).

Re: [gentoo-user] Re: Overclocking CPU causes segmentation fault

[Michael Mol]

On Wed, Jan 23, 2013 at 12:16 PM, Volker Armin Hemmann
<volkerarmin@googlemail.com> wrote:
> Am 23.01.2013 16:35, schrieb Nikos Chantziaras:
>> On 23/01/13 17:09, Nilesh Govindrajan wrote:
>>> On Wednesday 23 January 2013 07:52:03 PM IST, Nikos Chantziaras wrote:
>>>> [...]
>>>> In my experience, most of the time you can overclock.  The issue is
>>>> with the user not knowing exactly how to do it.  You need to
>>>> understand a few things and how they affect each other.  It's not just
>>>> a knob you can turn.
>>>
>>> That pretty much applies to me. I don't know much about hardware stuff.
>>> Regarding your 1 Ghz overclock, you probably have good components in
>>> terms of RAM & SMPS.
>>> When I bought this rig in 2008, I knew nothing about good components,
>>> blindly trusted local vendor... also internet shopping wasn't advanced
>>> here.
>>> So pretty much substandard components.
>>
>> The part that's really important is the mainboard.  RAM doesn't
>> matter.  In my case, I had pretty basic 800MHz DDR2 RAM.  Raising the
>> FSB would bring it above that, so I changed the DRAM ratio to 1:1, and
>> the RAM then ran at only 600Mhz.
>>
>> That was the starting point to rule out RAM problems.  After that, I
>> raised FSB but kept the VCore constant until I hit the first
>> instabilities.  When that happened, I raised VCore a bit.  Rinse and
>> repeat, until the VCore was still below the maximum recommendation by
>> Intel.  That happened at 3.4GHz (378MHz FSB * 9 CPU multiplier =
>> 3402MHz CPU clock.)  The E6600 CPU I got was an average sample.
>> Others were running it at 3.6GHz (or even higher with water cooling.)
>>
>> This was a process that took about 3 days to complete (needs a lot of
>> stability testing.)  The good thing about those older CPUs was that
>> the performance boost I got by OCing wasn't just scaling linearly with
>> the CPU frequency.  It was scaling *better* than that, because raising
>> the FSB also made the mainboard itself perform better and with lower
>> latencies.
>>
> and here we are - the point where the suspension of disbelief ends.
>
> All you may have gained you threw away with the slower ram - and you are
> trying to tell us that your rig was faster?
>
> You do know that with today's CPUs the CPU is not the bottleneck - the
> slow as molasses, no speed bump for 10 years ram is.
>
> (just look at the internal clock rate of dram chips - and you realize
> that ddr1-3 are pretty much the same crap).
>

Volker, in applications speficially tuned to keep their hot data small
enough to stay in CPU cache (so, anything with a "frames per second"
measurement), overclocking the CPU would still see performance
improvements. Cache misses are always painful.


--
:wq

[gentoo-user] Re: Overclocking CPU causes segmentation fault

[Nikos Chantziaras]

On 23/01/13 19:16, Volker Armin Hemmann wrote:
> Am 23.01.2013 16:35, schrieb Nikos Chantziaras:
>> On 23/01/13 17:09, Nilesh Govindrajan wrote:
>>> On Wednesday 23 January 2013 07:52:03 PM IST, Nikos Chantziaras wrote:
>>>> [...]
>>>> In my experience, most of the time you can overclock.  The issue is
>>>> with the user not knowing exactly how to do it.  You need to
>>>> understand a few things and how they affect each other.  It's not just
>>>> a knob you can turn.
>>>
>>> That pretty much applies to me. I don't know much about hardware stuff.
>>> Regarding your 1 Ghz overclock, you probably have good components in
>>> terms of RAM & SMPS.
>>> When I bought this rig in 2008, I knew nothing about good components,
>>> blindly trusted local vendor... also internet shopping wasn't advanced
>>> here.
>>> So pretty much substandard components.
>>
>> The part that's really important is the mainboard.  RAM doesn't
>> matter.  In my case, I had pretty basic 800MHz DDR2 RAM.  Raising the
>> FSB would bring it above that, so I changed the DRAM ratio to 1:1, and
>> the RAM then ran at only 600Mhz.
>>
>> That was the starting point to rule out RAM problems.  After that, I
>> raised FSB but kept the VCore constant until I hit the first
>> instabilities.  When that happened, I raised VCore a bit.  Rinse and
>> repeat, until the VCore was still below the maximum recommendation by
>> Intel.  That happened at 3.4GHz (378MHz FSB * 9 CPU multiplier =
>> 3402MHz CPU clock.)  The E6600 CPU I got was an average sample.
>> Others were running it at 3.6GHz (or even higher with water cooling.)
>>
>> This was a process that took about 3 days to complete (needs a lot of
>> stability testing.)  The good thing about those older CPUs was that
>> the performance boost I got by OCing wasn't just scaling linearly with
>> the CPU frequency.  It was scaling *better* than that, because raising
>> the FSB also made the mainboard itself perform better and with lower
>> latencies.
>>
> and here we are - the point where the suspension of disbelief ends.
>
> All you may have gained you threw away with the slower ram - and you are
> trying to tell us that your rig was faster?

Yes.  It made the difference in all games.  I'm talking 40 vs 60FPS 
here.  It was huge.

The RAM wasn't much slower.  Stock was 800 and I was running it at 756.


> You do know that with today's CPUs the CPU is not the bottleneck - the
> slow as molasses, no speed bump for 10 years ram is.
>
> (just look at the internal clock rate of dram chips - and you realize
> that ddr1-3 are pretty much the same crap).

The slightly slower RAM had no effect.  As I said, the performance gain 
was huge.  If the RAM ends up heavily underclocked to the FSB change, 
you just pick another ratio for it that brings it closer to its stock 
frequency, or slightly above it.  Again, a good motherboard that has 
plenty of ratios to choose from helps immensely.

Of course today this isn't important anymore.  On my i5 CPU I can change 
the CPU multiplier.  Not that I do; performance is plenty right now 
without OCing.  I intend to overclock it in the future, just like I did 
with the C2D; if new games get more demanding, I'll do it then.

[gentoo-user] Re: Overclocking CPU causes segmentation fault

[Nikos Chantziaras]

On 23/01/13 19:13, Volker Armin Hemmann wrote:
> Am 23.01.2013 09:21, schrieb Nikos Chantziaras:
>> On 23/01/13 03:55, Dale wrote:
>>> [...]
>>> I tired overclocking once a good while back.  It just wasn't worth it.
>>
>> I've been running a Core 2 Duo from 2.4Ghz to 3.4Ghz for over three
>> years.  Instead of a new CPU, I only bought a €30 cooler.
>>
>> Oh, it *was* totally worth it.  Mainly for games, where the
>> performance difference was really dramatic.
>
> yeah and all those files with bit flips (not a problem with films or
> pics or mp3s....) you don't know about were totally worth it...

Stability testing is important.  If no bit gets flipped after 5 hours of 
Prime95, one can be confident that the chip can take it.  But I never 
noticed anything.  At least git would have picked this up (I'm working 
on a project with 330k lines of code; a change gets picked up as a 
difference.)

But I agree; if I had any hugely important data on my system, I would 
not have OCed it.  I do not consider game saves, email and porn as 
hugely important :-P  The source code *is* important, but I said, it's 
on a git server and therefore guarded against corruption.

Re: [gentoo-user] Overclocking CPU causes segmentation fault

[Peter Humphrey]

On Wednesday 23 January 2013 01:55:19 Dale wrote:

> Also, I used to run foldingathome.  It does not do well with
> overclocking.  It will error out pretty quick.  I tried this on a Abit
> NF7 v2 mobo.  At that time, they were pretty much the king of
> overclocking.  I bought everything intending to overclock but it wasn't
> worth it.  I had a HUGE copper heat sink on that CPU.

I remember your enthusiasm at the time. I'm glad you came back down to earth 
in the end :-)

-- 
Peter

Re: [gentoo-user] Overclocking CPU causes segmentation fault

[Dale]

Peter Humphrey wrote:
> On Wednesday 23 January 2013 01:55:19 Dale wrote:
>
>> Also, I used to run foldingathome.  It does not do well with
>> overclocking.  It will error out pretty quick.  I tried this on a Abit
>> NF7 v2 mobo.  At that time, they were pretty much the king of
>> overclocking.  I bought everything intending to overclock but it wasn't
>> worth it.  I had a HUGE copper heat sink on that CPU.
> I remember your enthusiasm at the time. I'm glad you came back down to earth 
> in the end :-)
>


I still would run folding if it would work right.  It seems every time I
turn around, something was broke.  The biggest problem, when I start it,
there is no work to do.  I haven't tried it this year.  Just never got
around to it. 

So, if it worked, I'd still be doing it.  I'm not cured of my medical
issues but wouldn't mind donating to help with someone else's.  One
never knows what it could lead too or already has. 

Dale

:-)  :-) 

-- 
I am only responsible for what I said ... Not for what you understood or how you interpreted my words!