System Assembly

Once you have all the parts, it's time to put everything together. We're going to assume that you know the basic process, but here's our order for assembling a new system.
  1. Remove all components from boxes and lay them out on the workbench in an orderly fashion. (Check for order errors.)
  2. Install the CPU into the motherboard socket with the motherboard resting on the padded foam cushion with which it shipped.


    Click to enlarge.

  3. Apply a small amount of thermal paste to the center of the CPU heat spreader, then smooth it out a bit using your finger, a razor blade, etc. The idea is to get a thin layer on the heat sink, and you don't need to cover the whole CPU surface; once the HSF is installed, the thermal grease will flatten out to cover the rest of the CPU surface and you don't want a lot of extra grease. (Technically, AMD voids your CPU warranty if you don't use approved thermal grease. We've never had to deal with a failed Athlon 64 chip yet, so we can't comment on how they would respond. Overclocking is already voiding the warranty, so we're not worried about "approved" thermal compounds.)
  4. Install the heat sink onto the CPU - carefully. Depending on which HSF that you decide to purchase, you may need to change the mounting bracket, back plate, etc. One of the reasons why we like the Thermalright HSF is because you don't need to change the back plate (which is sometimes "glued" onto the motherboard). Don't forget to connect the fan to the 3-pin CPU header on the motherboard.
  5. Install the RAM into the appropriate slots. For the DFI board, that would be slots 3 and 4 (the two closest to the CPU). Other manufacturers number their slots differently and may separate the RAM for dual channel operation. Read the manual for your motherboard.


    Click to enlarge.

  6. If your case doesn't already have the power supply installed, it's generally best to install that now. Otherwise, the HSF for the CPU can get in the way. This varies by case, of course, but we almost always find it easier to get the PSU in before anything else.
  7. Install the motherboard mounts (usually little brass colored screws/bolts) into the case. Only put the mounts in places that match up to the holes on the motherboard. The DFI INFINITY has seven holes and thus requires seven mounts. You don't want extra mounts installed, as they could create a short on the bottom of the motherboard. Also, swap out your case's backplate for the one provided with your motherboard. (We have yet to encounter a case with a backplate that matches any motherboard that we've purchased.)
  8. Place the motherboard carefully into the case; you may have to work a little to get the backplate to line up with the rear I/O panel of the motherboard. Don't force anything. Once the board is in place, install the screws that secure the motherboard. Note that before installing the motherboard, depending on the case and your dexterity, it might be easier to connect the wires for the front panel of the case - power and HDD LEDs, reset and power switches, and speaker are almost always present. In our experience, the colored wires are usually the positive feed and the black (or white) wires are for ground. (I still get the LEDs backwards half the time, I think. If your HDD/Power lights don't come on, reverse the pins.)
  9. Install your graphics card, hard drive(s), DVD drive(s), cables, etc. We try to keep all the cables tidy, and you can use zip ties, velcro wraps, or even twisty ties if you don't mind a slightly ghetto approach. You might want to wait a minute before really securing all cables, just to be sure that all of the parts work properly. For now, plug the main SATA drive into SATA port 1. (If you're dead set on using RAID for your OS drive, you'll need a floppy disk with a driver on it.)
  10. Install any other fans or components, and make sure everything has power. Check the voltage switch on the rear of the PSU to make sure that it's set to 115V (or 230V depending on your location). Then plug in the power cord from the wall to the rear of your PSU, hold your breath, and turn on the system. Verify that all the fans are spinning.


    Click to enlarge.

  11. If the computer doesn't turn on, check that everything is seated properly and begin troubleshooting. Take it slow and don't jump to conclusions (i.e. "My RAM is bad!") Check the connections from the front panel of the case, as you might have simply installed the power switch cable incorrectly. Check all the other cables as well. If you have spare parts that you know work properly, try swapping them one at a time. Try running with just the CPU, graphics and RAM installed (no HDD or DVD). You might also want to remove the motherboard from the case and try powering on the system with the board sitting on the padded cushion (and anti-static bag) on your work area. If that works, check for anything in the case that might be grounding the board. You can try fully disassembling the PC and trying again, with the hope that perhaps you'll find your error in the process. Beyond that, you're on your own. Try the forums for help if you can't figure it out, but be patient and polite.
If everything powers up okay, enter the BIOS and check the values there. Set the date and time, boot device order, enable num-lock and the keyboard rate if you want. We're not going to go into a lot of detail with the BIOS just yet, as the standard settings should be fine for installing Windows. There are a couple of items that we would definitely check, though. First, make sure that your power management is set to ACPI (Advanced Configuration and Power Interface). If it's disabled, Windows will install a non-ACPI kernel and you're stuck with that unless you jump through some hacks to get the ACPI kernel installed. If you don't want ACPI, that's fine, but remember which you choose and stick with it, or your OS won't boot. (There's a good chance that you'll have to reset your BIOS to its default settings while you're working on determining the optimal overclock settings, so if you don't stick with the default ACPI setting, remember to change it each time.) The other item that you may need to check is the SATA mode. Different motherboards use other names for the setting, but on our DFI board, we set the SATA mode to "enhanced", which means that the OS can see it as an IDE device. That allows you to install XP without using a floppy disk with the appropriate SATA driver.

With the system up and running, install the OS and drivers. We use SATA drives almost exclusively for new PCs, which is why it's important to check the BIOS settings. Installing XP and the drivers is pretty simple, so we're not going to go into much detail. Use your CD and key, and then when XP is installed, you use the driver CD that comes with your motherboard. That will get you network, sound, and chipset drivers. You might want to check for newer versions online once you have networking installed, or else download them in advance on another PC and copy them to the new system. We also grab all the latest Windows Updates for any system with Internet access, though not necessarily for performance testing. Since we're only using one board, we installed all the Windows Updates along with a bunch of other software that we'll use in benchmarking. We also recommend switching your SATA hard drive to port 3 or 4 (or one of the extra ports) once Windows is installed. SATA ports 1 and 2 generally don't behave well when you begin overclocking beyond a certain threshold, and with the drivers installed, Windows should boot fine whether your primary drive is connected to port 1 or 3 or something else.

You'll note that up to this point, we haven't even talked about overclocking our new system. If you don't realize this already, let's make this clear: get your OS installed and running and test all your programs before you start overclocking! Setting up a new PC is a complex process, and even experienced system builders encounter problems. You don't want to have the Windows XP install program crash at 95% complete due to an overclock. It's not nearly as bad to have the system crash once you have it working, which is why we say to wait. Even then, it is possible to have an overclocked system crash and corrupt files, forcing you to reinstall applications or even XP from scratch. (It happened at least once in my testing, though not with socket 939.) There's a risk, but for many, the potential rewards outweigh the risk.

Case and CPU Cooling BIOS Settings
Comments Locked

101 Comments

View All Comments

  • Deathcharge - Saturday, October 15, 2005 - link

    also what do you think of opteron 144 or 146? the 144 are very cheap and they OC quite well apprently
  • pmorcos - Thursday, October 13, 2005 - link

    Before I comment, you should know that I have been overclocking for 8 years now and literally overclocked all but one of the chips you mentioned in the beginning of this very good article. The HT multiplier was new to me with my most recent DFI NF4-SLI-DR board so I found that extremely useful and plan to see if I can up my speeds...but I digress.

    I think it would be extremely valuable to TRY to put in words the order with which an overclocker should approach making changes to settings. In other words, which is likely to be the most limiting/critical aspect(s) and from there tweak the others to max the system out.
    It would be interesting to say, for example, that you start with a "safe" power settings (which is pretty obviously the limiting factor). For example, let's say your CPU and memory are rated at 1.3 and 2.8 V respectively. Why not go straight to "safe" settings for the two and tweak from there? It seems that the most useful piece of information that is NOT provided by anandtech or anyone else for that matter is a voltage and temp graph of stability/viability for these chips. It would be simple to take 3 samples (at a cost) of each chip and run the test with "average" cooling and find out what is "safe". For example if running all stock settings but upping voltages to say 2.4/3.6 V in the example above, you might see stability up to 1.65 / 3.1 V with the parts catching fire at say 1.8/3.3 V or stable at temp readings for cpu/memory of 44/47C but unstable above that. Once armed with these two graphs of information averaged from 3 chips tested the rest is very straight forward.

    You simply set the cpu volts to 1.65 and memory to 3.1 V (the safe settings; check real voltages vis bios monitoring) and now you up your fsb and tweak your memory timings and in a few minutes you are running max.

    Why do I think this is more valuable that showing us a graph of your results? Because like many I'm squeemish about upping the voltage on my processor and memory. I'm worried much more about the power-on affects than I am the "long-term" effects.
    In computers, there are no long-terms for an overclocker. An overclocker's comp is 60% hardware and 40% software. Their greatest joy is in posting results on their favorite forum. I want to know that when I hit the power button...that the 1.7V setting does NOT have a 10% chance of blowing my processor.
    My ramblings. Thanks again for another great article from by far the VERY BEST place in the world to find out how computer parts work.
  • JarredWalton - Thursday, October 13, 2005 - link

    Thanks pmorcos.

    I'm working on the X2 3800+ OC followup, and I've gone back and done further testing of temperatures and voltages. Chips differ, so the real advice I have on that subject is to test your own chip extensively. I've heard of people doing 2.8 GHz on 1.500V with the Venice chips, but mine won't even POST at those settings. I think 1.65 or 1.70V was required to POST, and even then I couldn't run stable benchmarks without more voltage.

    I will also be trying to cover a bit more of the "how to" process in the next one. Consider this the foundation, and the next article will refine the approach a bit. Your comments on what you'd like to see more of are definitely welcome, though, and I'll try to address the order and approach I take next.

    Concerning another comment: "I want to know that when I hit the power button...that the 1.7V setting does NOT have a 10% chance of blowing my processor." I'm not quite sure I understand the concern or know how to test that. Are you saying that the power on process has more voltage fluctuations and may therefore toast the CPU in the first second? (I haven't had that happen over the past several months of testing this chip and others in overclocked setups.) I must admit that I'm extremely nervous about the 1.850V I used for running at 2.80 GHz, but even then the chip continued to function (for now - heheh).

    Cheers!
    Jarred Walton
  • WhipperSnapper - Thursday, October 13, 2005 - link


    That was one of the best computer enthusiast website articles that I've read in a long time, but perhaps I don't get around too much. I'd like to hear more about the problems that spilled over to other components, such as the SATA hard drive (mentioned in the Final Thoughts) and whether or not the overclocking can be isolated to the CPU and RAM. I also wondered if there was a reason why you guys used a SATA hard drive and not an IDE drive and whether overclocking requires a SATA hard drive. (I don't see why it would.)

    Also, have you guys tried to do any tests using memory stick heatsinks? Do they actually do anything? That subject might make for a worthwhile article on its own--RAM cooling.
  • aptinio - Saturday, October 8, 2005 - link

    bravo! great article. very informative but not too bloated. can't wait to finally upgrade my amd k6-II with 1mb l3 cache on the motherboard! lol!
  • Kougar7 - Thursday, October 6, 2005 - link

    Thank you for the excellent, comprehensive, and very thorough article! :-) It must have taken a massive amount of work and time to complete. It’s answered my recent musings about my own Crucial value ram, which looks much nicer now! It’s also solved a question about OCing with recent AMD 64 chips, amongst also correcting a few personal misconceptions I’ve had.

    I just wish to ask if you plan to include a similar article on OCing with P4s? I personally run a 2.8C (Northwood) @ 3.4 rock solid at the 3.4C’s default voltage, but am now wondering exactly what performance hits, if any, that I’ve taken from having to use a 5:4 CPU:DRAM ratio instead of the previous 1:1, even though I’ve kept it at DDR390 and the timings better than specs.

    I’m planning to bench the differences from a 1:1 ratio, a 3:2 ratio at highest speed I can get (sub-DDR333), my current setup, and finally one other setting where I got the value memory to run 2-2-2-6 timings, to get a more solid idea on which performs best with some solid figures.

    Although the core and the platform itself both have both changed, I’d still be interested in a Intel processor based test! Perhaps instead of a P4, maybe a Pentium “D” OCing article similar to what you have planned with the X2 3800+? ;-)

    I’m very much looking forward to your X2 3800+ OCing review!! You rock :-D Thanks in advance for it!
  • JarredWalton - Thursday, October 6, 2005 - link

    I'm trying to get a socket 775 motherboard that will overclock well with Pentium D 820. Once I get that, I can give it a go. I've also got a Pentium 4 505 and a 540 that I want to run some similar tests on. First, though, I need an appropriate motherboard.
  • clue22 - Thursday, October 6, 2005 - link

    so basically what the everybody is saying about the value RAM vs. low latency more expensive RAM is that for the athlon 64 it is basically a waste of money (i.e. you only get about 5% performance gain), but usually spend 100% or more money to get the "better" RAM. i have to build a couple of systems pretty soon and now i believe that my money would be better spent on 2GB of value RAM vs. 1GB of the more expensive stuff. does anyone know of a test that has been run with 2.5-3-3-8-1t vs. 2-2-2-5-1t? also why does every mid-range/gaming/hot-rod price guide ever recommend the either the samsung tccd (or tcc5) or winbond bh5/ch5 based memory if it has so little effect on performance. finally is it even important anymore (if it ever was) to get matched pairs of memory that are bundled together (supposedly manufactured at the same time)? i was looking at some corsair (had good experience with them in the past) xms3200xl RAM but now i think i should get more of their value select memory instead.

    thanks
  • RupertS - Wednesday, October 26, 2005 - link

    so basically what the everybody is saying about the value RAM vs. low latency more expensive RAM is that for the athlon 64 it is basically a waste of money

    This may not be a general rule.

    It may just be that at this stage of development for GPU's, CPU's and memory, memory has more than enough capacity - it is not the choke point. If GPU and CPU speed were to improve while memory speed stayed the same, you might reach the point where increasing GPU and CPU speed was non-productive for games, while overclocking memory provided large performance improvements.
  • rabbit fighter - Wednesday, October 5, 2005 - link

    Where was this explained? He said the 3200 was better in the first paragraph and that he would explain later, but I can't find the later explanation!

Log in

Don't have an account? Sign up now