What's new
  • Please do not post any links until you have 3 posts as they will automatically be rejected to prevent SPAM. Many words are also blocked due to being used in SPAM Messages. Thanks!

Mushkin

3.0charlie

3.0 "I kill SR2's" Charlie
Joined
May 22, 2007
Messages
9,905
Location
Bedford QC
It's not the Ram... it's the 480FSB. You're pushing that QX9650, and stability at those speeds is very difficult to reach. 450 is usually tops.

I know, I had one too.
 

Xilikon

Well-known member
Joined
Oct 9, 2008
Messages
447
Location
Quebec City
It's not the Ram... it's the 480FSB. You're pushing that QX9650, and stability at those speeds is very difficult to reach. 450 is usually tops.

I know, I had one too.
Agreed, 480x9 is pushing too far. Most will settle with 480-500x8 for 4 GHz. Above this, it's a crapshoot.
 

MpG

Well-known member
Joined
Aug 2, 2007
Messages
3,132
Location
Kitchener, ON
Thirded. The RAM isn't the problem here. You're just banging the uppers limits of your processor, especially for Prime95 stability. That 4.1 is quite nice, but anything beyond that is going to paid for in heat and processor life expectancy. For now, drop your FSB and raise your multi - your FSB is almost certainly maxed out, but you might have a little more headroom in the processor.
 

Mark

Well-known member
Joined
Sep 17, 2008
Messages
854
Location
Bolton, Ontario
It's not the Ram... it's the 480FSB. You're pushing that QX9650, and stability at those speeds is very difficult to reach. 450 is usually tops.

I know, I had one too.
Agreed, 480x9 is pushing too far. Most will settle with 480-500x8 for 4 GHz. Above this, it's a crapshoot.
Thirded. The RAM isn't the problem here. You're just banging the uppers limits of your processor, especially for Prime95 stability. That 4.1 is quite nice, but anything beyond that is going to paid for in heat and processor life expectancy. For now, drop your FSB and raise your multi - your FSB is almost certainly maxed out, but you might have a little more headroom in the processor.
Then I'll stick with 410 x 10 running 1649 stable. Keep in mind 480 x 8 was totally stable.

Thanks

Nice to have 2nd, 3rd or 4th opinions.

Cheers.
 

cadaveca

Banned
Joined
Jun 29, 2007
Messages
1,619
Location
Edmonton
Website
www.xtremesystems.com
I'll add a fifth to agree.

Keep in mind also that 480FSB with 8 signals is less work that nine signals...

But I would up the FSB term votlage, as that board undervolts a tad, and PLL could go up as well. Altohugh, I highly doubt these will have any effect.
 

Mark

Well-known member
Joined
Sep 17, 2008
Messages
854
Location
Bolton, Ontario
I'll add a fifth to agree.

Keep in mind also that 480FSB with 8 signals is less work that nine signals...

But I would up the FSB term votlage, as that board undervolts a tad, and PLL could go up as well. Altohugh, I highly doubt these will have any effect.
What would be better? Place your bets on gaming, 3dmark, PI:

410x10 at 1600mhz or
500x7 at 1600mhz

I'll post results:)
 

Twitter

Top