Jump to content
15 posts in this topic

Recommended Posts

Ok so I have hit now 4.35Ghz with my rig which should normally run at 3.0ghz. However in Xp these days i Have been running 4.0 no problem. Yes I have upped the voltage a bit and messed with the bios in order to get it here, however It seems that the ceiling on OSX is greater than XP. In XP I could get in at 4.2Ghz, however it would crash running anything CPU intensive. Well at 4.35Ghz in Hackintosh 10.4.8 She is running like a champ.

 

Getting a lil over 300 in geek bench,

 

http://www.geekpatrol.ca/browse/2006/?view&id=9150

 

Getting 166 in X Bench,

 

http://db.xbench.com/merge.xhtml?doc1=2012...;setCookie=true

 

Ok enough gloating, I am more curious what others experance has been in addition to, well now that I can OC the {censored} out of my CPU, anyone got an Nvidia GPU OC program? I looked around on MacVidia and here and only found some info on fan speed and making adjustments in the bios. Once again I would like to Thank JAS Titan, and all the many more that have helped to make this possible.

Are you getting you oc number from ATM?

 

 

ATM? I am not sure what you are referring too. When I boot I hit F8 and type FSB=what I want ect and it boots. It is being reported by the Benchmark Utility correctly. In addition my scores get incrementally better for each benchmark that i run at a higher FSB. Right now I am running at 310mhz FSB. So you multiply that by 15 and thats my CPU speed. The 830D is locked at a 15x multiplier. Right now I am running at 4.65Ghz

 

http://db.xbench.com/merge.xhtml?doc1=2012...;setCookie=true

 

http://www.geekpatrol.ca/browse/2006/?view&id=9154

5.1Ghz does it stop. Bumped the Core voltage up to 1.55Volts and she is running strong.

 

http://db.xbench.com/merge.xhtml?doc1=2012...;setCookie=true

 

http://www.geekpatrol.ca/browse/2006/?view&id=9156

 

So am I crazy? Or is anyone else getting this? I don't have any liquid cooling just a good case and good HSF and a northbridge cooler

does setting the fsb= actually overclock the CPU? i thought you had to overclock in the bios, and then the fsb= just told the OS what speed the hardware was running so that it could adjust timing sensitive routines accordingly.

 

i don't know that much about this, but i'm saying this because of my experience on my Conroe E6600, which is 2.4Ghz (266Mhz FSB) standard, but when i OC'ed it to 2.6Ghz (292MHz FSB), the real-time clock (the AM/PM one) was running fast, which I fixed by adding the FSB=292 in the boot plist.

 

so to me, it seems like the FSB= setting just tells the OS what the hw is doing. however, i can't explain the improvements of your bench scores.

does setting the fsb= actually overclock the CPU? i thought you had to overclock in the bios, and then the fsb= just told the OS what speed the hardware was running so that it could adjust timing sensitive routines accordingly.

 

i don't know that much about this, but i'm saying this because of my experience on my Conroe E6600, which is 2.4Ghz (266Mhz FSB) standard, but when i OC'ed it to 2.6Ghz (292MHz FSB), the real-time clock (the AM/PM one) was running fast, which I fixed by adding the FSB=292 in the boot plist.

 

so to me, it seems like the FSB= setting just tells the OS what the hw is doing. however, i can't explain the improvements of your bench scores.

 

 

Now I might be full of it but as far as I can tell by setting the FSB by FSB=# you are telling the OS what to tell the MB to run at. That would make sense too because every MB has soft bios and you can change the FSB on the fly. I am typing this at 6.0Ghz it does have some quirks and isn't perfect but impressive to see it here all the same. In the bios I just have the computer set at 3.0Ghz and then have the voltage and everything else tweaked. So in theory by telling the OS to load at 400fsb it will mulitiply it to 1600FSB and 400 x 15 = 6000MHZ or 6.0GHZ. So I am pretty sure that is correct and nothing else would explain my results.

ChuckDSanders, ATM, About This Mac :idea: Nothing about your bank card :D

 

I wouldn't put to much faith in those numbers, unless you really think your processor would ever be capable of 6Ghz. I think ATM readings are just adding the settings up and your not really running at those speeds.

 

No matter how efficient you think mac is, your processor and most of the things around it would ;)

 

If you could actually run anything at those speeds, I don't think any OS could keep up or even boot.

 

: http://www.guru3d.com/newsitem.php?id=3329

i don't know that much about this, but i'm saying this because of my experience on my Conroe E6600, which is 2.4Ghz (266Mhz FSB) standard, but when i OC'ed it to 2.6Ghz (292MHz FSB), the real-time clock (the AM/PM one) was running fast, which I fixed by adding the FSB=292 in the boot plist.

 

so to me, it seems like the FSB= setting just tells the OS what the hw is doing. however, i can't explain the improvements of your bench scores.

 

If setting the FSB speed incorrectly causes the system clock to go slow or fast (depending if the speed was over-exaggerated or under-exaggerated) then it makes sense that benchmark scores will be, well, wonky since Geekbench (and I'd imagine Xbench) uses the system clock to time benchmarks.

 

For example, if the FSB is over-exaggerated, then the system clock will run slow. A benchmark that takes a second to run will appear to take, oh, a half-second to run to the computer (and Geekbench), so the benchmark scores are double what they should be.

 

At least I now know what's up with the 12GHz Xeon....

If setting the FSB speed incorrectly causes the system clock to go slow or fast (depending if the speed was over-exaggerated or under-exaggerated) then it makes sense that benchmark scores will be, well, wonky since Geekbench (and I'd imagine Xbench) uses the system clock to time benchmarks.

 

For example, if the FSB is over-exaggerated, then the system clock will run slow. A benchmark that takes a second to run will appear to take, oh, a half-second to run to the computer (and Geekbench), so the benchmark scores are double what they should be.

 

At least I now know what's up with the 12GHz Xeon....

 

Ahhh I see. Well interesting. I wasn't sure. I was under the impression that by setting the FSB at boot you were essentially instructing the MB what to set the FSB too. Does any one know this for sure? Or is that speculation that by setting the FSB manually does nothing just lets the OS how to time the operations? Atleast that I what I am gathering...

 

As for 6Ghz I belive you can do that with intels net burst architecture, however it required phase change cooling. thats why I asked, is this possible and why am I getting better scores. I can boot into windooz at 4.2Ghz and 1.55core voltage and it runs almost with out a hitch. however when I set the FSB from the bios and set it in OSX, the OS does goofy things, lags and burps almost, then when running in the bios at 200 say and then adjusting the FSB to say 266 at boot I get speed of 4.0Ghz or so and it does seem to run faster.

EL OH f***ing EL.

 

I'm sorry, but I just could not help but literally laugh my ass off at this thread.

 

The FSB option ONLY tells the kernel at what speed to run it's internal clock at. You were, in no way shape or form, changing your real hardware clock.

The reason you were getting better scores is the kernel thought you were doing things much faster.

 

:) Might as well put FSB 2983892749374937483 and watch it really fly.

EL OH f***ing EL.

 

I'm sorry, but I just could not help but literally laugh my ass off at this thread.

 

The FSB option ONLY tells the kernel at what speed to run it's internal clock at. You were, in no way shape or form, changing your real hardware clock.

The reason you were getting better scores is the kernel thought you were doing things much faster.

 

:) Might as well put FSB 2983892749374937483 and watch it really fly.

 

Awww Man, I was gonna say that. :)

 

But yes, the fsb= is only to tell the kernel what speed it runs at. With semthex's latest kernel, he has implemented fsb autodetection, meaning you don't have to enter fsb= anymore. :)

Awww Man, I was gonna say that. :hysterical:

 

But yes, the fsb= is only to tell the kernel what speed it runs at. With semthex's latest kernel, he has implemented fsb autodetection, meaning you don't have to enter fsb= anymore. :)

 

 

Well I have found this to be the case. Bummer, I thought it had to be too good to be true, now It isn't detecting the FSB correctly as far as what I would like to OC. I want a 266 instead of the stock 200 fsb or quad pumped 800 vs 1066. I edited the boot plist but with no luck. Any sugestions?

×
×
  • Create New...