Ok

[bigdawgfoxx]

VB you make a very good point. I have never overclocked before, but I plan on taking advice from people on here(clocker seems pretty damn smart about it), and I know the basics. I dont plan on overclocking immediatley either. I also dont plan on overclocking to where it is VERY unstable. I just want to overclock SOME not a TON. Mainly so I can say I overclock I guess lol. And about the 43 dollar mobo, I dont think I want a 43 dollar mobo. The Asus non Deluxe seems nice....anymore suggestions as to RAM? or anything?

Edit: Oh and Vb, you say that the difference is only different in benchmarks? Is that true? John Lennon has overclocked his from 1.8 to 2.2, I think you would tell a difference when your running programs and games for sure.

[clocker]

Originally posted by Virtualbody1234@14 November 2003 - 08:38


And about that 2600+ and 3200+ comparison. I just have to point out that you don't end up with the same thing. Maybe both are running at the same speed and settings but is it really intended to do that and are they equally stable?

That I can't say (yet) as I don't have a 3200 to play with.

I do know that AIDA 32 shows my set up over a 3200 w/ PC 3200 Ram.
I think that we can both agree that this falls into the catagory of hypothetical/theoretical advantages.

My pages don't seem to load any faster in IE6, my DL speed is still crappy and I can't see that I have noticed ANY percievable difference.

In fact, I am about to go back to stock specs just to see if there is a advantage temp-wise.

As far as stability goes, I have successfully run the burnin test and even the PI calc numerous times with no reported errors. No random reboots or system crashes.
Of course this is only applicable to the relatively short time that I have been running this configuration.

Long term, I have no doubt that your approach is the most sensible.

[bigdawgfoxx]

So your chip is faster then the 3200....and you see no difference?? So your 2400 seems the same to you as a 3200? I have never used an AMD past 2200. Its my friends emachine....512MB of ram...and it goes so freaking slow. I have reformated it and defragged it but i still sux. Newayz back to the 3200 2400 comparison?

[Virtualbody1234]

So, when some program crashes a month later will you be sure it's not caused by "SOME" overclocking?

I have done my share of overclocking and I know how it feels to try to diagnose troubles when overclocking could be the cause. I found myself undoing the overclocking to bring it back to normal to try to eliminate that doubt. I prefer to not have doubts as PCs have enough troubles as it is. Remember we are dealing with Microsoft in this equation here.

Also, as clocker has pointed out, there are plenty of other bottlenecks to slow you down. Overclocking won't make your internet stalls and slowdowns go away. I might just make you think... "hmmm, is this stalling caused by my overclocking?" More doubts.

[clocker]

BD,
I have a 2600+, not a 2400+.

The easiest way to determine your success ( or lack thereof) is to run a benchmark test.
The problem there is that you are testing in a pure environment without real world variables/impediments.

I am not a gamer, so any/all improvements have so far been completely undetectable to me.

Your results may vary.

As I stated before, this is more of an intellectual excercise for me. I am a confirmed tinkerer and I found the PC to be as irrisistable as my cars/bikes. I have also found the process to be very similar- make a change ...test...make another change...test...confirm results...ponder next step.

I have done quite a lot of websearching/reading about the subject over the past month, and VB is correct, most of the posts in these forums are along the lines of " What are the best settings for my "x" chip/"x" motherboard?"

A much more useful ( and safe) question would be " What procedure can I use to best optimise my system?"

What John Doe on some forum may run ( or actually claim to run) is completely irrelevant. Discovering how to generate your own results is far better than blindly swallowing some stranger's advice.
And that would apply to mine as well....

[bigdawgfoxx]

Thanx Clocker! So you dont see any difference in the 2600 and the "3200"...hmmm thats weird. Well If you dont see ANY difference then i dont see why I should overclock, unless someone begs to differ? Has anyone seen performance increases due to overclocking?

[clocker]

Probably someone who is into gaming would see a difference.

Although gaming is heavily dependent on video card specs....

[bigdawgfoxx]

So if i took a 2500 and made it 2.2Ghz...i prob wouldnt see much difference?

[clocker]

Try it for yourself and see what you think.

That has been the whole point of my last couple of posts.

You will certainly see benchmarking scores rise. Perhaps that warm and fuzzy feeling is all you require right now.
Perhaps you will notice a big difference.
Then you can assess the risk/benefit ratio and decide for yourself.

It's your equipment, why take just my word on it?

Or anyone's, for that matter.

[bigdawgfoxx]

lol ok, thanx for all yalls help. Now back to the original topic, RAM and Mobo...that can overclock good. I plan on using my 80GB Seagate, so I dont need RAID. SATA might be nice. I wont get ram any faster then 3200, or do I need that to overclock? thanx