Hey guys, I just need help with one thing. I've recently been able to reach an FSB of 240+ on my NF7-S but now I've got another issue. I am able to get past post but then Windows will not boot at all. Does this mean I must raise the vcore up a tad?
perhaps, did you lower your HTT multplier. Your ram may also be running too fast did you try a lower mem devider?
I get the same result with either 10, 11, or a 12 multiplier. I have been trying to use a ratio to keep my pc3200 (2GB) ram near 400mhz. Also, after post I get no Safe Mode/Windows didn't start correctly screen; it just goes blank with no message(s) at all...
yeah this chip doesn't support that fancy hyper-threading stuff that you boys got with those multi-cores (I'm still playing it oldskool for the most part). So, any other suggestions? I'm so close to reaching my target speed of 2.6ghz. If I can just figure out why I cannot get the OS to boot then I'll be good. Also, I'm using a modded bios that has disabled the CPC on my mobo. I have 2GB of pc3200 RAM so I needed the flash to enable better overclocking. I'd really appreciate any help I can get!
Correct me if I'm wrong, but doesn't the mobile 2600+ have an unlocked multiplier? Could you not just use a higher multiplier with a lower fsb?
Yes, the 2600+ has an unlocked multiplier but using a higher setting requires more juice...which equals more heat. Also, as I raise the multiplier, I am leaving my RAM out of the equation, thus running it completely out of sync. @ 2.4ghz and a x12 multiplier (my current setup), my ddr speed is perfect at 400mhz. Changing the multiplier causes my RAM to run way out of sync. I must use a lower multi and a higher FSB, along with the fsb/dram ratio in order to achieve a higher overall overclock. I just haven't been able to do so.
Sounds like your motherboard's limitation... It's looking like your only option for more MHz is a higher CPU multi along with a little more voltage - but then you have to watch your temps. Remember the math... - you do realize that you're still only talking about 200MHz, right? Even back in the Athlon XP days of CPUs, you couldn't 'feel' 200MHz, so it might not even be as holy of a grail that you seek! Psychlone
Yep, I got that equation you gave me pasted in a .txt file somewhere. I was trying to figure out the equation for 2600mhz but I just got confused when it came to the ratios. (I did fail a lot of math assignments in school so you'll have to cut me a break :help As long as I see 2600+ mhz in CPU-Z I'll be happy; as far as "real" performance goes, I know it's not really going to mean much.
