Hi all,

My machiche have 4 OS (OS X 10.5.4, Vista x64, Ubuntu x64 and Windows XP 32bits)
My processor is a E8400 overclocked to 4.0 GHz (9x445), rock solid on windows (prime stable 8hs - small an large FFTs). The fact is, when I boot on Leopard some crashes start happen. I increase some voltages, like vcore, FSB and MCH and the crashes still happens. The next step, I decrease my FSB. First I went to 425, everything seems to be okay, but on heavy load, almost 100% (two virtual machines, many youtube videos, skype, itunes, one HD video) another crash. One courious thing is, one especific advertisement video, of linux distro (http://www.elivecd.org/), even on half load, crashes my Leopard. One more time I lowered the FSB. This time to 400 (9x400). Now I can put everything running toghether and my Leopard is rock solid. I can run two virtual machines, many youtube videos, skype, itunes, one HD video, plus that video of linux distro and everything goes fine. After leopard is rock solid at 3.6 GHz (9x400) I did some tests, just to be sure. First I load my 4.0GHz CMOS (rock solid on Windows) then put the multiplier on 6 (6 x 445 = 2.67 GHz) and keep all other settings. Boot again on Leopard and that 'infamous' video (alone) still able to crash my Leopard.

My spec.

E8400 stable on Leopard at (3.6GHz) On Windows I can get, easily, over 4.0GHz.
Gigabyte GA-EP35-DS4
4GB (2 x 2GB) OCZ Reaper DDR2 - 1066 (5-5-5-18) 2.1v
Sapphire HD3870 - 512MB 256bits GDDR4

Instalation method:
Leopard 10.5.0 retail + combo update 10.5.4 + kext needed.

Any advice or sugestion will be welcome.

You sure your set up is not overheating? Windows's PowerManagement + SpeedStep might be masking the problem as SpeedStep does not work on hackintosh without major hacking.
omol

I'm sure the heat is not the problem. My computer never goes over (4.0GHz - load 52c) (3.8 GHz - Load 47c) running prime95 for 8hs+ on two cores at 100%. All my fans are running at 100% because I disabled smart fan on bios.

On Leopard, if the FSB is around 445, is not necessary stress so much, maybe 60% on both cores, for less than 10 minutes, will broke my running.

I have the same issue trying to OC my e7200 on a GA-P31-DS3L. Problem with mine is that if I get over 395 FSB, SATA drive isn't seen and thus won't boot, even with the PCI-e bus locked and verified locked in Winblows.

Are you sure that the memory divider is not the problem?

I guess the memory divider is not the problem. All the time I kept my memories specifications. I tested even with 1:1 (450 MHz, beneath my factory spec 533 MHz - DDR2-1066), and had the same problem.

I have another hackintosh using another Gigabyte motherboard (GA-945GCMX-S2) and I guess the limit, on that motherboard, is the PCI-e bus lock, but I did not test it. I don't know why, I am not a programmer, but I think Leopard is less tolerant with some limits. For example, I will presume the PCI-e on my GA-945GCMX-S2 is not well locked. In that case I could reach higher overclock on windows as on Leopard again.

All the time I have seen people with E8400, putting their E8400 to running at 3.6Ghz and saying they stay on this limit, because they feel more confortable with volts, temps, etc. But is hard to believe. My E8400, at 3.6 is running on volts below my VID (1.200) and the temps, with aftermarket heatsink and fan, is below then the same processor at stock speed an stock heatsink and fan. I am starting to belive they can't get Leopard really stable over 3.6GHz, maybe just a little bit more. At 4.0 GHz I can't say it is stable on Leopard. At 3.8Ghz seems stable, but on heavy load (almost 100%) it will crash at some point. At 3.6GHz is really stable.

If the Leopard really have some kind of "FSB wall", the people who wants overclock their machines, need to think more before choose their processor. I choosed the E8400 because it could reach easily 4.0GHz and could you imagine a "mac" at 4.0GHz? But on the real world, if I am not wrong about the "FSB wall" on Leopard, is much better stay with Q6600 at 3.6GHz.
Anyway, my Q6600 is coming today! I will use it undervolted for some days and then overclock, probably to 3.6GHz.

In some days I will put the results here.

I will be glad if more people put their results here. This topic is fundamental to people who wants a higer clocked hackintosh.

no problem here. see sig

my board will not post above 470fsb (need to tweak nb voltage)
my ram/cpu sweet spot is at 455 1:1
465 is the highest i can get but need to loosen up the timings

Hi, good to know your machine is running fine.

Did you heavy load your machine like my first post? For Leopard, we don't have stress tools like in Windows world, at least that I know of. The only way I found was to run several apps at the same time and to watch activity monitor show 0% idle for some time. For day-to-day use 4.0GHz may seems stable, but if you push it to the limits, my machine at least, will crash. In Windows, at same speed (4.0GHz), a can run prime95, orthos, occt for several hours and everytime will pass all the tests. That is the reason that I belive Leopard is less tolerant with the High FSB then windows.

Anyway, thanks for your post. Could you try to run your hackintosh on heavy load (try to reach 0% idle for some minutes) and post the results here? I am trying to discover why the same hardware is totaly stable on one Operating System and isn't in the other one. The only thing changed is the OS. After many tests I think the high FSB is the bad guy in the history.

I will be glad if more people with hackintosh (FSB 450+) try to heavy load (0% IDLE on activity monitor), for some minutes, and post the results here.

Thanks in advance.

To stress your CPU in OSX, download this free utility:

http://mac.softpedia.com/progDownload/CPUT...load-23539.html

Thanks, aqua-mac. At the moment I swap my E8400 with my new Q6600. My PC will be running undervolted, for some days, before I overclock it. As soon as possible, I will try this app with E8400 overclocked to 4.0GHz.

at these speed, i render/capture/encode using imoviehd, idvd and quicktimepro without any issue. 40gb h264 rendered. cpu load around 80-100%, temps go as high as 80C when o'c at 3.6

my only problem was when using 4gb ram, while encoding using toast, memory is at full. added 2gb for now and so far no slowing (avoid swap file)

if it's stable in windows (prime95 stable on all cores) it should be stable on macosx, my suggestion is try fresh install of macosx if problem still exist even on q6600

Or you can use the Mac version of Prime 95.

http://www.mersenne.org/gimps/

I am using a fresh install (retail DVD + chameleon + kext needed). I am not sure, but maybe any of the kext I add or changed could be the problem.




Thanks, MacUser2525. I downloaded the OSX version.

any luck? i changed to uatx board g33 chipset and it still works at 450fsb

I've also hit a wall...
Im also using an e8400 with gigabyte ep35-ds3l
I've settled for 3.4 with the multiplier on 9
I figured it was my ram that was holding me back since im using 6400... thinking bout getting some 8500
any suggestions on brand.....????

Has anyone been able to get a temperature monitor working on leopard for a 45nm chip like the E8400....???
I hate having to boot into windows to check my temps on an overclock....

Now I am running my Q6600. Yesterday I overclocked to 3.6 (9 x 400) and everything works flawless. But 400 is not a problem for my E8400 too. One thing is intriguing me, why my E8400 was stable on windows and wasn't on Leopard. I agree with you when you said: "if it's stable in windows (prime95 stable on all cores) it should be stable on macosx..." Anyway, I read in some place that one guy said his overclock was stable on windows, but he needed higher the vcore voltage to be stable on Leopard. I higher mine a notch, maybe not sufficient to be stable, because I presumed if was stable on Windows, should be on Leopard.

When my E8400 coming back I will try higer voltages on vcore. Anyway, kitmac seems to have the same problem and his hardware (Processor + Motherboard) is similar to mine.

With your RAM you could hit, at least, 3.6GHz. Some DDR2-6400 could reach 900 or more. Which brand and model are you using?

If you are looking for RAM, in my opinion OCZ, G.Skill, GEIL are great brands.

About temperature monitor, used to use Hardware Monitor from http://www.bresink.com/osx/HardwareMonitor.html to monitor temps on Leopard, but for 45 nm I think is more reliable to use a Windows program like Real Temp and, one time you had stressed with prime95, orthos or OCCT, for some time, you will know your max temps and, if your max temps are okay, you don't need to worry with them on Leopard.

If you reach FSB 450 on Leopard (rock solid), with your actual or another RAM, please post you results here.

currently using Patriot PDC24G6400LLK 's @ 5-5-5-12 when clocked at 450 windows will restart on orthos or any other test and leopard wont even boot up...various kernel panics...

HardwareMonitor just gives me temps for my hard disks but no CPU.....

Once I get some 8500 ram i'll start testing and post here...
G Skill's R good overclockers right........????

Strange, Hardware Monitor, even unregistred, gave me temps on both cores. Did you try to configure it?

Every good brand has different types of memories (performance, value, etc...). The overclock ability depends on many factors like: memory size (generaly 1GB module overclocks better than 2GB modules), memory "class" (performance, value...) and other factors. Yes, G. Skill has good overclockers, just read some reviews, before you buy, to ensure that specific model will reach your needs.

You don't need a good overclocker to reach the limit of your E8400. If you to use 1:1 divider, with a DDR2-8500 (533) will be able to reach for example (9 x 533 = 4.8GHz impossible, even on water) or (8 x 533 = 4.26 GHz). How can you see, you won't need a memory with great overclock ability. Probably you will reach the temp or vcore limit (for 24/7 use) before you need to overclock your RAM.

Yup tried my best with various versions on Hardwaremonitor... no luck

Basically I just want ram that will allow me to overclock the E8400 to 3.6 on 9 multiplier with decent temps and use on a daily basis... not really tryin to break any world records..

What do u think 4 sticks of 8500 or 2 sticks 2gb each......???

Thanx 4 the advice animus...

Generally 2 x 1GB overclocks better than 2 x 2GB memory sticks, but here I am talking about overclock the memories. In your case, you will not overclock the memories, but the processor. Any non-defective DDR2-6400 should reach 400MHz (because it is the stock) and, in this case, you could reach 3.6GHz (9 x 400) with your actual memories.

Did you try to put your FSB voltage to +0.05 and your MCH voltage to +0.025 with your actual memories? Did you changed your SPD from auto to manual and changed it to multiplier 2.0? Are your memory volts correct?

If you are planning to stay 3.6GHz you don't need to spend money with memories (of course I am presuming your memories are good). But if want to spend some money, I would go with 2 x 2GB, because you could put two more sticks and you will not stress so much the NB (the stress in NB is bigger if you use 4 sticks). If you buy DDR2-8500, put FSB=400 (9x 400 = 3.6GHz), memory multiplier to 2.5 and you will have a 3.6GHz processor and a 1000MHz memory. Don't forget to check, in the System Health (in the BIOS), if the voltage of your RAM is correct. Sometimes the BIOS doesn't configure the correct voltage to DDR2-8500 and you should do it manually.

im running @ 470x6 right now and doing prime test as we speak on mac, so far no crash yet
i actually notice i have to increase my vcore about 0.025v to be stable on mac compare to winblows.
i dont really know what to say, i was thinking might be your board but you said it runs fine on windows.

Today I ran 470x6, with my Q6600, perfectly. No crashes like my E8400. Thus I can presume:

1) My motherboard is okay.
2) Probably Leopard has no problem with high FSB.
3) Probably my E8400 just need more vcore to be stable on Leopard.
4) High FSB seems to be okay on Leopard, but also seems Leopard needs more vcore than Windows to be stable.

Anyway, I think is soon to take a final conclusion, because there are a lot variants involved in, like:

1) It is a PC running Leopard and each one have a set of hardware.
2) Maybe one version of determined kext make the things more stable than others.
3) There are a lot of procedures to install Leopard, some people use pre-built versions, others prefer install using Leopard retail DVD.
4) And more...

But I am happy to see you, me and others agree Leopard need a litlle bit more vcore to be stable.

I am planning to buy a P45 motherboard to put my E8400. At the moment I prefer my Q6600 at 3.6GHz than my E8400, even at 4.0GHz. It is like a tank. I like to open several apps at the same time and quads are incredible to virtualization. Of course, on bechies, not optmized to 4 cores, the E8400 will take a higher score on CPU. But on real world, in my opinion, my Q6600 is much better. I don't want start another war between 2 or 4 cores. I belive it depends of the use of the user. For almost all games, at the moment, 2 cores, at higher speed, will perform better, but I am not a gamer and for my day-to-day use, I feel better with 4 cores.

yah you're right about the quad vs the duo's on macosx, i get high xbench score on my duo than my quad but it still feels faster on quad even on stock vs my duo at 3.8, geekbench is another story.
on winblows, my duo feels much faster.

good to hear that you can now push that fsb higher.