Investigations into Socket 939 Athlon 64 Overclocking
by Jarred Walton on October 3, 2005 4:35 PM EST- Posted in
- CPUs
Test Configuration
9000 words into the article, and we still haven't even given you benchmarks or tested settings. Hopefully, we've managed to convey something of the complexity involved in overclocking. If you already knew all of the preceding material, think of it as a quick refresher course. If you're new to overclocking and skimmed most of that, your success in overclocking is going to be limited. Patience is a major component for any overclocking endeavor. Skimming a guide, finding some tested numbers, and plugging them into your BIOS may work fine, but more likely, you'll have periodic instability and you'll be stuck as to what needs to be changed in order to fix the problem. Now, we're finally ready to give you our test setup and the settings that we used for the various overclocks.
Our system configuration is definitely targeting value rather than the high end. The OCZ RAM is decent, but the remaining parts are mostly mid-range. We've listed the current prices in the above table, and we're looking at about $900 without the monitor, keyboard, mouse, speakers, and power supply - assuming that you use the included PSU in the Antec case. Dropping to value RAM can cut another $70 from the price. While a slightly nicer PSU isn't a bad idea, the OCZ 600W is overkill for non-SLI setups, for sure - which is why we list it as an alternative. If you're looking at running an Athlon 64 X2 with 2x1024MB of RAM and dual 7800GTX cards, we've seen an overclocked setup actually break the 400W mark, so 600W might not be a bad idea in that case.
The graphics card is going to be something of a limitation, as the X800 Pro is certainly not going to compete with a high-end card like a 7800GTX. For the cost, though, it's really not a bad choice. The X800 GT and GTO cards also look good, priced at under $200. Since we're looking at a value-oriented overclocking setup, running a high-end graphics card that eats up more than half the total cost of the system is a bit extreme. However, we'll try to get some benchmarks in a future article looking at exactly that sort of setup. For gaming, at least, the GPU is going to be the critical factor in reaching high frame rates
Because of the GPU limitation, we're going to be testing at 640x480, 800x600, and 1024x768. We'll also test many of the titles with 4xAA enabled, which should serve as a reality check. Even with a super fast CPU, many games are going to be completely GPU limited with the X800 Pro when we run 4xAA, especially at resolutions 1024x768 and above. Frankly, we wouldn't bother enabling 4xAA unless you can at least reach 1024x768 anyway.
9000 words into the article, and we still haven't even given you benchmarks or tested settings. Hopefully, we've managed to convey something of the complexity involved in overclocking. If you already knew all of the preceding material, think of it as a quick refresher course. If you're new to overclocking and skimmed most of that, your success in overclocking is going to be limited. Patience is a major component for any overclocking endeavor. Skimming a guide, finding some tested numbers, and plugging them into your BIOS may work fine, but more likely, you'll have periodic instability and you'll be stuck as to what needs to be changed in order to fix the problem. Now, we're finally ready to give you our test setup and the settings that we used for the various overclocks.
| AMD Overclocking System | ||
| Hardware | Component | Price |
| Processor | Athlon 64 3200+ Venice 512K 2.0GHz (939) - Retail | 190 |
| Motherboard | DFI nF4 INFINITY | 95 |
| Memory | OCZ Rev. 2 Platinum (TCCD) 2-2-2-5-1T | 162 |
| Video Card | (PowerColor) X800Pro PCIe | 224 |
| Hard Drive | Seagate SATA 250GB 7200RPM 8MB 7200.8 NCQ | 109 |
| Optical Drive | NEC 3540A Black (OEM) | 45 |
| Case | Antec SLK3700-BQE | 90 |
| Bottom Line | 915 | |
| Optional Parts | ||
| Hardware | Component | Price |
| Memory | OCZ Gold VX PC-4000 2x512MB 2-2-2-8 @3.3V | 183 |
| Memory | PC-3200 2x512MB Value CL2.5 | 85 |
| Power Supply | OCZ PowerStream 600W | 190 |
Our system configuration is definitely targeting value rather than the high end. The OCZ RAM is decent, but the remaining parts are mostly mid-range. We've listed the current prices in the above table, and we're looking at about $900 without the monitor, keyboard, mouse, speakers, and power supply - assuming that you use the included PSU in the Antec case. Dropping to value RAM can cut another $70 from the price. While a slightly nicer PSU isn't a bad idea, the OCZ 600W is overkill for non-SLI setups, for sure - which is why we list it as an alternative. If you're looking at running an Athlon 64 X2 with 2x1024MB of RAM and dual 7800GTX cards, we've seen an overclocked setup actually break the 400W mark, so 600W might not be a bad idea in that case.
The graphics card is going to be something of a limitation, as the X800 Pro is certainly not going to compete with a high-end card like a 7800GTX. For the cost, though, it's really not a bad choice. The X800 GT and GTO cards also look good, priced at under $200. Since we're looking at a value-oriented overclocking setup, running a high-end graphics card that eats up more than half the total cost of the system is a bit extreme. However, we'll try to get some benchmarks in a future article looking at exactly that sort of setup. For gaming, at least, the GPU is going to be the critical factor in reaching high frame rates
Because of the GPU limitation, we're going to be testing at 640x480, 800x600, and 1024x768. We'll also test many of the titles with 4xAA enabled, which should serve as a reality check. Even with a super fast CPU, many games are going to be completely GPU limited with the X800 Pro when we run 4xAA, especially at resolutions 1024x768 and above. Frankly, we wouldn't bother enabling 4xAA unless you can at least reach 1024x768 anyway.
Facebook
Twitter
RSS
101 Comments
View All Comments
intellon - Tuesday, October 4, 2005 - link
I understand how/why the memory quality is not too imoprtant (5-9% increase for 100 bucks = not worthy)What I AM unclear about is the cpu itself. Would all the cpu's based on venice hit a same ceiling. Or would a 3800+ reach a higher, more stable, cooler overclock than the 3200+? There is one line that mentions these two cpu's on the first page but no comment on how they would perform when overclocked. Does a 12x help over 9x? Also am I wrong in assuming that you picked 3200+ over 3000+ because of a higher multiplier?
And like people are asking... how bad/good are the other chips? How'll a San Diego 3500+ fare against a Venice 3500+? They're faster as stock, but can they match or exceed overclock performance of venice?
Questions questions questions...
The article was wicked though. I was skeptical about buying a cheaper RAM... but seeing how another $50 is not going to help, I'll save that money for something else.
gplracer - Tuesday, October 4, 2005 - link
Very nice article. It appears to be well thought out. Thanks for the time you spent on it. I would also be nice to have an article of this type with some of the more popular power supplies.I to have had several chips that would overclock such as:
P166 @ 200mhz lol
Celeron 300a @ 450mhz
Duron 600 @ 950mhz
Athlon 1700+ (DLTC3) @ 2374mhz
2600+ at 250x10= 2500mhz
There is no way you could add all of the cpus to the review. I look forward to overclocking a dual core athlon64.
PaBlooD - Tuesday, October 4, 2005 - link
Great Articule.. thanks for that great work.I actually have a A64 3200+ Winchester core with an Epox 9NDA3+ + 512 x2 ocz premier (crap ) and i only can get the procesor to 2150 mhz... i tried with safe memo times.. but nothing..are that bad overclockers the Winchester cores? :S
(excuse my poor english ^_^)
RaulAssis - Wednesday, December 21, 2005 - link
Didi you try memory deviders like 5/6 ?yacoub - Tuesday, October 4, 2005 - link
I definitely appreciate all the walk-through of overclocking an A64 system. Very good article. One thing though - the last few pages with the test result charts... the charts make it look like the entire notion of overclocking is rather pointless since all four colored lines are nearly identical in all but a couple tests. You might want to consider a different type of chart next time that gives a -visual- impression of the benefit to better support the written descriptive increases in performance. Maybe some sort of bar chart would have worked better.JarredWalton - Tuesday, October 4, 2005 - link
I felt the visual impression conveyed exactly what I saw: the difference between the 3000+ and 3200+ in overclocking combined with value and performance RAM is, at best, small. I understand what you're saying, and trust me: I played around with the Excel graphs for many hours. None of the graphs really gave a clear picture, unfortunately. Getting four setups with about 9 settings each into a single chart is messy. Having 80 charts is even worse. Heheh.If someone can show me a preferred chart style, I'll be happy to change the graph for the next installment. The AnandTech graphing engine really wasn't capable of dealing with this type of data set, unfortunately... but Excel was only marginally better.
intellon - Tuesday, October 4, 2005 - link
I guess you could "ZOOM IN" onto the y-axis. For instance: on the last graph HL2 1024x768 4xAA, since the minimum was above 80 and max was below 140, you could set the min and max ranges of y-axis accordingly. or go GNU plot way for a sharper graph.JarredWalton - Tuesday, October 4, 2005 - link
Like the 3DMark GPU scores? I really dislike graphs that don't start at 0, because it hides the reality. (That's why I put the extra paragraph on the 3DMark scores noting specifically that they don't start at 0.) I can blow up a graph so that everyone can see the 1 or 2% margin of victory, but what does that really say? Margin of error on several benchmarks is at least 1 or 2%, and in actual use I don't think anyone will really notice even a 5% difference - I know I don't.Some people will be annoyed by this, but too many people worry about the last 1% of performance. Not because they can notice a difference, but because they want meaningless bragging rights. Sitting in the top positions in an online game requires skill. Getting 1% higher FPS usually just involves throwing more money at your PC than the next guy. Some people like to do that - sort of like some people like muscle cars. I want a fast computer, but I'm not going to lose sleep because my PC is marginally slower than my friend's, you know?
Anyway, I may look into a separate graphing tool. Excel looks fine internally, but getting the graphs into image form didn't work perfectly. The text alignment got a little tweaked when I cut and pasted the data into Photoshop.
Regards,
Jarred Walton
RupertS - Wednesday, October 19, 2005 - link
Be careful, I think Muscle Car owners are a protected class.probedb - Tuesday, October 4, 2005 - link
I'd just like to say cheers for this. It's made me finally get round to trying to OC my system. I purposely bought a 3000+ and Crucial Ballistix for this but have never got round to trying it.I shall give it a go this weekend!!!