Overclocking and Durability

Hello, my name is Emilio and i live in Argentina. I recently purchased the machine described in the sig. The thing is, with the economy here this machine has to last forever. In my company's system i put in all the old machines when i buy a new one, so for you guys to have an idea this is the system: one Pentium 133, one AMDK6 400, one PIII 700, and one Duron 1.6. I can't even remember when i got the first machine and it still runs in win98, oddly enough the K6 and the PIII are the fastest ones, they even load win98 faster than my new Athlon loads winXP.
Anyways... This new machine is the first one overclock-friendly, and i've heard overclocking, aside from the ocasional crash, heavily reduces the machines life. That is not important in the first world, where you can change your machine every year, but here it is a big deal. So i wish to ask everyone their opinion (or better, their experience) on overclocking and durability, and after all, is overclocking such a good idea really?
Emilio

Hi,
I suppose it depends on your rig. Personally, I didn't see any real benefits from overclocking - I was expecting much greater speed and 3Dmark 2001 scores - than I got.
I left it overclocked (1533MHz OC't to around 1800MHz) for a week then set my machine back to stock, the difference between the two was barely noticeable in all modes of use.
Conclusion: disadvantages outway the benefits.
As I say though, it depends on your rig.
Axel  :D

Similar Messages

  • MOVED: Overclocking and RAID, do they mix???

    This topic has been moved to Overclockers & Modding Corner.
    Overclocking and RAID, do they mix???

    What board do you have?  It makes a difference in this case.  For example, the Via K8T800 based boards do not have PCI/AGP locks, so raising the FSB overclocks all the other components as well, including the HDD controller, and it has been observed that for these boards, RAID arrays will become unstable at FSB settings above about 225 MHz, at most, so overclocking and RAID do not really gotogether on these boards.  The nforce3 based boards, on the other hand, should have PCI/AGP locks, though I think (but I'm not sure) that you have to explicitly enable them in BIOS, and I've seen some threads questioning whether or not they actually work, so again the board might have problems with high FSB settings, although I'm pretty sure an nforce3 board would have a working lock and thus be able to overclock with a RAID array defined.  Finally, if you have a nforce4 based board, it should definately have a functional lock on it, and it should handle the RAID just fine when overclocking.

  • MOVED: BIOS 3.4 - destroyed overclock and wierd CPU prob

    This topic has been moved to Overclockers & Modding Corner.
    BIOS 3.4 - destroyed overclock and wierd CPU prob

    Happy to see you have problem cause only few mention this.
    I have it too with Venice 3500+. Forced multiplier 5, forced min. voltage and I get a cool 5x200. To fix it I must use HTT of 5, then rest acts normal. Anything but 5 and it defaults to this minimum setup. Yes, C&Q is turned off. May be if we set up C&Q in OS that would help but not going to happen.
    Solution for me is to use bios 3.2 which dont have either RAID bug or 219 bug - which actually is a 22x bug for me. Ive done all P95 tests at 11x246 for min. 12 hours. Im not happy with solution or 3.2 though and hope new beta also fix this problem not so many talk about. Think Ive seen 5-6 crying about it in public. With HTT 5 you wouldnt notice, guess most use that.
    If you test new beta bios and it does fix this please post so I know 3.5 is worth waiting for. Beta is not 100% compatible with our mobo I think - not sure you should flash unless you got bios savior, some have done it but Im not going to.
    Link to beta https://forum-en.msi.com/index.php?topic=82493.0 but be careful...

  • Overclocking and upgrading ram

    Is the processor overclockable, and is the memory upgradeable to 6 or 8Gb

    uscwaller wrote:
    Is the processor overclockable,.....
    I don't know if it is. But I do know the MBA is the very last computer I would consider for such. Overclocking generates more heat, and if you were doing so to increase performnce, the MBA would surely give you overheating problems.

  • [svn] 686: Bug: BLZ-62 - durable and durable-store-manager config options

    Revision: 686
    Author: [email protected]
    Date: 2008-02-28 13:32:29 -0800 (Thu, 28 Feb 2008)
    Log Message:
    Bug: BLZ-62 - durable and durable-store-manager config options
    QA: No
    Doc: Yes - remove durable-store-manager from our docs and make sure durable is explained properly.
    Details: Removed references of durable-store-manager from sample config and bootstrap service files and made sure that durable config option is explained properly (that it is only used by JMS adapter currently).
    Ticket Links:
    http://bugs.adobe.com/jira/browse/BLZ-62
    Modified Paths:
    blazeds/branches/3.0.x/resources/config/bootstrapservices/MessagingBootstrapService.java
    blazeds/branches/3.0.x/resources/config/messaging-config.xml

    Firstly, there's no such thing as Apache 9.3, there's Apache 1 (and subversions) and Apache 2 (and subversions). Your error message -
    Oracle-HTTP-Server/1.3.28Shows you're using Apache 1.3.28
    Secondly, I'm confused by your comment -
    I do not have Apache 9.3 or higher but I think oracle should offer this in its companion CDOracle does offer the Apache server, if you're saying you didn't get it from Oracle then where did your Apache server come from?
    Thirdly, I notice from your config file -
    ErrorLog "|E:\oracle\product\10.1.0\Companion\Apache\Apache\bin\rotatelogs logs/error_log 43200"That you're piping the logs through rotatelogs, are you sure the logfiles haven't just been renamed?

  • Transient and Durable Process

    Can anyone explain me what is transient and durable bpel processes are?
    Regards
    Senthil R

    Senthil, as far as my knowledge no such information is stored in database.
    Sundar, what is your goal? We normally work with our simple sync and async terms only. Transient/Durable or one/two way invocation are the ways to categorize the BPEL Process and its activities to improve the performance. I request you to study BPEL Threading Model. You can refer the OTN page http://download.oracle.com/docs/cd/B31017_01/core.1013/b28942/tuning_bpel.htm and get more information.
    As you will be aware, typical sync process is a single web service call where the process is initiated, executes the logic and sends the response back to caller. Till the response arrives the caller would be waiting for that (and timeout calculations would be going on). Synchronous are typical Transient process if the criterion in the above forum post is matched. But suppose, in any invoke activity the idempotent property is set to false (default is true), the BPEL process will dehydrate the instance soon after that invoke activity and this process is durable process. Hope this explains.
    Ahmed is right, he writes that durable processes are long-living and initiated through a one-way invocation. There might be separate call back for such processes to send the response back to the caller process. Typical Async example.

  • Overclocking and to D.O.T or not to D.O.T?

    First off, please forgive my very newbish question here. While I have built a couple of systems, this is my first journey into the world of overclocking.
    A bit of background:
    The rig I have built in my sig, with no overclocking, has been performing very well and rock solid with gaming and general use for 8 months now. I have just started to venture into the world of video editing and converting my videos into a format that can be streamed. That is when I hit the performace wall, and realized for this kind of CPU hungry use I needed to either upgrade my build  after a pitifully short 8 months, or look into overclocking my system to squeeze every ounce of performance I can get from it. Not having wads of cash readily available, I decided to get my feet wet in overclocking.
    My first foray into overclocking has been to just stick my toes into the water and let the system overclock for me using the D.O.T options in the BIOS. Doing some experimenting, I have found that I can get some fairly good gains in performance ~+10% in benchmarks by simply bumping the D.O.T level to 'colonel'. The 'general' setting is unstable, giving me the BSOD whenever the overclocking kicks in.
    Here is some hopefully relevent info on my setup. This is the CPU-Z display when D.O.T has kicked in.
    Temp wise I go from 37C (idle) to 47C (Overclocked Load)
    And here are my benchmarks when using D.O.T: (3DMark05)
    Main Test Results
    3DMark Score 5321 3DMarks
    CPU Score     5156 CPUMarks
    Okay, now to the meat of my question.
    How much CPU headroom do I have on my hardware, above and beyond what I am getting with the D.O.T settings I am using? I have reached the limit as far as using D.O.T('general' setting being unstable), but could I get significantly better gains if I manually overclocked?
    Or.. would I be better off staying ignorant of the mysteries of manual overclocking, and just save my money to one day buy an Athalon X2?
    Thanks!

    first of all, if you are using DOT, you have no control on the OC. the system is overclocked using some defaults settings programed into the cell chip. that means that it doesn't take into consideration the hardware you are using, and its limitations. this might result in instability.
    second, the max OC with DOT is 11% if i remember correctly. that is a puny OC attempt, especially if you are running a A64 3000+ like i do. i can get to almost 50% OC for the CPU using different methods than DOT, instead of 11%.

  • Overclocking and the MSI K7N2 Delta ILSR

    Hi everyone,
    I wanna overclock my system. But, I've experienced several problems.
    Problem one: When i try to set my memory timings manual (3-3-3-8)
    in the BIOS, CPU-Z, Everest etc shows CL2.5.... instead of the CL3.0 that I've selected in the BIOS.
    The second problem: When i raise the front side bus to 200MHz FSB, and doing the same with the memory speed (200MHz, 1:1 Synchronous with the CPU..)
    I get many BSOD's in Windows... So I've tried to raise the RAS#to CAS# delay to 4, the same for #RAS Precharge (also 4) and the Cycle Time (TRAS) at 11.
    But this also doesn't work... The memory voltage is already at 2.7V, and it can't get higher...
    How can i get this board working on a FSB of 400MHz (200) ? On my previous board (KT600) I've reached the 2.31 Ghz without problems, totally stable.
    Anyhelp will be appreciated. 
    For my specifications, see my signature.
    Edit: Oh, i see that i have placed my topic in the wrong place, sorry for that.

    Quote from: Computerfreakje on 01-December-06, 22:26:05
    Thanks for above suggestions. But, as I said before,  i can't change the CAS Latency of my memory... When i set the CAS to 3 in the bios, it stays at 2.5.... (checked with CPU-Z, Everest, CPUID) Is this a known bios-issue?
    And my memory is designed to run at 200Mhz CL3.0-3-3-8.... I guess that's the thing that causes the instability... is that possible?
    And before i flash my bios, I'd like to know if this solves my problem. As i said before, on my previous motherboard, i ran 210Mhz without a problem... totally stable..
    Thanks.
    - Computerfreakje
    "When i set the CAS to 3 in the bios, it stays at 2.5.... (checked with CPU-Z, Everest, CPUID) Is this a known bios-issue?"
    possible, with newest or modded should work normal.(never had similar issue) also underpowered memory stick can cause instability, with modded BIOS should be able to setup mem. vcore to 2.8V which is arround 2.76V(mobo is undervolted), also your Kingston required at least 2.75V to work property at ranked speed with default timings.
    "When i set the CAS to 3 in the bios, it stays at 2.5....And my memory is designed to run at 200Mhz CL3.0-3-3-8.... I guess that's the thing that causes the instability... is that possible?"
    yes its possible.
    "And before i flash my bios, I'd like to know if this solves my problem. As i said before, on my previous motherboard, i ran 210Mhz without a problem... totally stable.."
    your prevision mobo is much different.
    follow this tips:
    go into BIOS and Enable "Super Stability Mode", setup "FSB:RAM" Ratio in 1:1, setup "CPU Interface" to Normal,
    apply memory timings as follow:
    CAS: 3
    TRCD: 3
    TRP: 3
    TRAS: 9
    and memory vcore(Voltage) to 2.8V.
    get a copy of Memtest86 and create bootable diskette or cd-rom(can be found on memtest site), boot from diskette, when memtest started select and use test number 5 only, that can be done via this keyboard shortcuts from a memtest ("c","1","3","5") ensure you can loop/pass test 20 times without errors.
    post back results if there errors come report how much per pass is it. if there are errors go back into BIOS and start pull back FSB by 10Mhz (etc: apply 190FSB) and re-test with memtest. Ensure you have DIMM1 is filled with memory stick(close to CPU socket).
    post back results. also check memory sticks individually to ensure there is no malfunction/defective stick.
    also single/dual CH differences on Nforce2 is around 1%.

  • Overclocking and the nForce2: The Basics

    Ok, I've been meaning to write this for awhile, and I know I'm going to get some flack over it, which is good, because others' opinions give me more options to choose from. Additionally, nothing is "set in stone."
    First of all, overclocking (at this point in technology) for performance gains is RELATIVELY useless. This is truly the first generation of hardware that has truly outpaced the abilities of software authors to write code, and by the time they catch up, at least one new generation of hardware will be produced. There ARE a few exceptions to this, most notably, in the fields of video and audio processing, but even then OC'ing has only limited advantages.
    The problem is polyfold.
    First of all, most systems are "bottlenecked" at the hard drive. Using physics as the basis, your system turns physical energy into electronic, and while electricty runs close to the speed of light, hard drives definitely don't even run at the speed of sound. In today's generation of hardware, an OC'ed system would only be able to pull info from the HD at the same rate as its stock comtemporary. Caching only alleviates this problem, but doesn't even come close to solving it, especially because, in an environment of 256M - 1GB of memory most programs depend on caching anyway, through interleaving. (Interleaving is the method of creating HD extensions for RAM, allowing users to run programs bigger than their physical RAM capacities, in either single tasking (e.g. one window) or multitasking environments [e.g. more than one window.])
    Secondly, and most importantly, small changes in OC'ing are rarely, if ever, noticeable under "normal" (application) usage. A 6 to 8 Mhz change in a 333 to 400 Mhz FSB system results in a performance increase of approximately only 2 - 3%, and, (according to modern psycholgy; I hold a 2001 Bachelor's of Science in Psychology from the University of California, cum laude) humans don't really perceive changes in time unless above approximately 15% or better. Even then, the change is barely perceptible, and takes around a 25% - 33% increase to be appreciable. People CAN OC chips (e.g. Thunderbird or Barton) and achieve these throughputs in an otherwise relatively sluggish system, eliminating true processing time bottlenecks...but these don't exist in an environment consisting of a fast processor, fast memory, and fast board (the AVERAGE setup of an nForce2, with the exceptions of OC'ed T-Bird and Bartons...more on this later.) We're more likely to NOTICE improvements from better and better drivers, since they affect stability and control or influence data that comes from / goes to the hard drive and how it is processed.
    So for those of you performance-minded users, relax and enjoy the stability of stock settings (after the T-Birders and Bartoners OC their CPU first...we can wait, but before they do, perhaps they should read the rest of this post.)
    For CPU and memory OC'ers (and non OC'ers as well), it's always a good thing for the brain and memory to operate at their relative peaks, and in synchronation, even if the rest of the body is subject to "real time" constraints. Therefore, a 1:1 FSB to memory ratio is the optimal sync. With computers, if this is mismatched, you don't get the benefit of EACH AND EVERY clock cycle. Newbies, don't worry if you don't understand it, just believe it. Seasoned pros already know this. (The only real exception is when is a multiple of the other, theoretical e.g. in a 100 MHZ (system maximum) FSB and a 200 MHZ memory; there is always a memory clock cycle in the right time and place for communication with the CPU.)
    Which brings me to the discussion of current and voltage. If you OC, you need to up the voltages. Period. Now while I know that many OC'ers run stably with stock voltages, there's still reason to up the CPU and memory core voltages. The reason is current. Current (amperage), not voltage, creates heat. Most semiconductor devices are designed to draw a certain amount of POWER (Current x Voltage.) If your settings expect more from them, as OC'ing does, they will draw more POWER. In a voltage-limited environment (like your PC), your devices will attempt to create more total POWER by drawing more current. This leads to unnecessary and damaging heat. By upping your voltage (within reasonable operating range of your devices), you reduce the amount of current the system needs to run more cooly and efficiently. As long as you stay within safe tolerance, this is a good idea for the stability-minded non-OC'er as well. It's not unusual to see small temp drops after upping voltage, if nothing else has been changed.) For those of you running a 300 to 350W power supply, this could mean the difference between failure and success, because...
    Current also raises an issue which I've written about here before: the power supply. In an nForce system, I recommend nothing less than a power supply rated @ 30 amps or more on the 3.3V output. The video and memory simply cannot be denied, and if you're running an nForce2 with a GB of memory @ 2700 or better, you're asking for trouble with 28 Amps or less. Besides, it's not good to run a system that's always close to the peak maximums of the PS: bad for the supply, and thus, the stability and reliablity of the entire system. Video cards are prone to "surges." More speedy sudden color and action requires more current. Power supplies must be instantly able to keep up with this peak demand. Like a runner near the finish line, a PS cannot deliver that burst if it's already running at or close to peak maximum. My suggestion is an ANTEC True480 or better (or any similarly-rated, good quality supply) for nForce2. [A popular alternative as of late are the 1/2 size 300W redundant supplies, capable of delivering 600 watts total. You gain another advantage as well: if one of the supplies ever dies, you can stay up and limp your system to shutdown. (This is my next move, personally, and before anything else. I want rock-solid power because I process video, a time and power consuming process.)]
    Lastly, synthetic benchmarks (like 3DMark) don't tell the whole story. They cannot tell you your own satisfaction level with your results. While an excellent performance-under-load diagnostic, once run, 3DMark creates its own niche in your mind, not on your PC. Remember, a "tweaked" .25% to 10% increase is unnoticeable, but it's good to know if something was really wrong (e.g. you're only getting 1/2 the score that others are using with your same setup. It's comforting to know that your system is running the way it should, otherwise, any other minor gain would not show up in "real world" usage.)
    Don't get me wrong. OC'ing in and of itself is a cool hobby, and a good way to learn more about computers (and somtimes costly as well.) But just as it's not safe to perform on the high-wire without a net, it's not safe to attempt too much power usage without the right power. It's also near-worthless to create or exacerbate a stability problem in order to otherwise unnoticeably increase in your PC's performance.
    Be happy; be stable. Nothing is more frustrating (except children) than the old BSOD.

    Hi Clarkkent57,
    I was quite impressed by your post - a very interesting read.
    I recently Over-clocked my XP1800 Thoroughbred B (from 1537 to around 1900,) and I was gob smacked (North-Eastern England colloquial term) when I noticed no difference at all!!! (I thought I did a couple of times during a couple of laps of "Need for speed 2" - but in the end I put it down to my imagination.) I was, however visited by the dreaded BSOD on a couple of occasions - something I'm not used to (not since dumping Windows ME - anyway - LOL.)
    I used it like this for around a week, then decided to set it back to defaults. I then thought, I might notice the system Slow down, again, no noticeable difference.
    I'm now running my machine at "Stock" until I can afford a better MoBo and CPU (not to mention a half-decent graphics card.)
    Somehow, knowing that over-clocking my CPU could shorten its life - doesn't appeal to me.
    Good on ya, for a fact-laden and well-reasoned post. :D
    Axel )

  • Overclocking and Benchmarking Applications

    Hey guys, what applications are you using for stressing and testing any machines that you've overclocked?
    I've looked at the following applications and/or live CD/DVDs, but I'm wondering if there is something else worth trying?
    StressLinux (liveCD)
    Phoronix-Test-Suite (apps and the liveDVD)
    Inquisitor (liveCD)
    Stress (application)
    CPUburn (application)
    Windows seems to have mounds of such software, but I'm not finding a lot for Linux, and I don't run Windows, so that's out.
    Thanks for any suggestions! 

    Those stress tests are good, but I like to take a more real world approach.
    For benchmarking a system, I usually tar xf linuxkernel, make (with make allyesconfig). Timing each step. Of course this may not be the best option for benchmarking a system. Maybe running software mode 3d programs would be better for benchmarking those kinds of things, since they will be probably more cpu intensive.

  • P35 neo2 FR overclock and fakeboot

    Hi.
    Is it normal that at 400x7 on every normal reboot motherboard makes 2 fakeboot?
    at 400x7 my sys is stable (~50min of orthos) but if i reboot the pc it makes 2 stop than start normally.
    no messages of wrong overclock or similar.
    at 333x9 I have no fake boot.there is normal reboot.
    my sys is in signature.
    ram are 2x2gb pc 6400 5-5-5-15 @default
    winxp and bios v1.8
    thanks

    Quote from: MS6524ETWILLAMETTE on 18-June-08, 17:01:18
    @ default settings it doesn't make "component test boot"
    @333x9 it doesn't make "component test boot"
    @from ~ 340fsb it starts to make "component test boot" every restart/power on.
    I've already wrote it above
    So, it is therefore not a malfunction with the mainboard, but an overclocking issue.
    Two things:-
    1) Posted in wrong section of Forum. https://forum-en.msi.com/index.php?board=27.0
    2) 1 or more of your components are not able to overclock as high as you would like to. After all, it is not just about adjusting the FSB, memory and voltages.....
    I think it would be fair to close this thread. 

  • Msi neo4 plat, sb audigy 2, max overclock, and xmod bios 1.b

    hi,
    sys as in sig.
    i could oc my cpu to about 2400 stable @1.45+6.6% and run everything under the sun. recently i read a thread here or @ rage3d saying something along the lines that audigy 2 does interfere with the max oc achieved.
    So i set out to test this theory. I raied fsb from 267 to 270 and ran mark05,06 and super pi. no problems
    then i ran dungeon siege 2, cod 2. all crashed with looping sound; symptoms of sb's interferece as described in the thread i read.
    I got curious upped vmod to 9.9%, raised fsb to 275. again all "torture" tests run okay, but not the games. infact not many games would last a couple of hours stable.
    I am using murdok's xmod 1.b. it has this option in the cell menu; set pci clock. usually it is set to auto. i disabled it. Anyone knows what does this exactly do?
    Anyways anyone here knows how to get over this sb thing other than to simply get rid of it??
    thanks in advance.

    disabled it cuz, i thought that overclocking the cpu caused the audigy 2 to playup (the only card i've on the pci bus)
    Since my last post, i've figured out that it was the soundcard causing the issues. I took it out and could reach 280*9, with 1.6 (Vmod).
    I plugged the card back in set it to standard acceleration in dxdiag, and all runs well. tinkering with the set pci clock made no difference at all! (i kinda had an idea what it did, but not exactly). so i set it back to enabled.
    thanks for ur reply.

  • Overclocking AND Undervolting

    ...I wonder, has anybody tried out this combination?  I just did (because the other day I stumbled across an article talking about how well the Athlon64 handles undervolting), and so far the results are pretty good...when I was overclocking my FSB to 215 MHz, I ran into some stability issues and boosted my vcore to 1.525 volts, but ultimately the instability traced back to the fact that my memory timings were just too aggressive for the higher speed, though I left my vcore at the increased setting anyways, until I found that article.  So today, I went back to my BIOS and specified a vcore of just 1.4 volts, and the system runs stably, even at the overclocked speed.  Furthermore, the thermal properties of the CPU are *much* improved:
    Athlon64 3000+ @ 215 MHz FSB, 1.525V vcore:
    idle temp = 4 to 7 degrees Celsius above ambient case temp
    full load temp = 48 to 50 degrees
    Athlon64 3000+ @ 215 MHz FSB, 1.4V vcore
    idle temp = 1 to 3 degrees Celsius above ambient case temp
    full load temp = 43 degrees
    ...other than that, my system stability so far seems to be exactly the same as it was at the higher voltage.  Benchmark scores remain identical to what they were before the undervolting...the only change is that the CPU now runs *much* cooler.  I'd always thought that overclocking required higher CPU voltages in order to maintain stability, but I guess not always.  Has anybody else experimented with undervolting an overclocked CPU, or am I the first?  Is there any reason for me to rush back to my BIOS and restore the previous voltage setting?

    I stumbled upon a little utility called ClockGen while reading a Tom's hardware article, and among its many features is the ability to set the vcore to values much lower than those present in the BIOS (it also allows multiplier manipulation, though my system crashed when I tried to raise mine...lowering it may be possible though).  I set my vcore to 1.30 V (still overclocked to 2.15GHz), and was stable for a few minutes, then got a spontaneous reboot...but anyways, SpeedFan did accurately show that my vcore voltage dropped from 1.4V to 1.3V before the reboot, and it's a pretty neat little utility if you're not too scared of making your system crash, so maybe some of you with non-overclocked CPU's can try going to 1.3V (or lower) and see how that goes.  The link is:
    http://www.cpuid.com/download/CG-ICS950403.zip
    NOTE (and this is important):  the above version of the utility is ONLY for people running the K8T Neo mainboard (i.e. MS-6702)...I don't know what would happen if you tried it with a different board, and I don't advise trying to find out.

  • Overclocking and multitouch hacks please

    I have a 5 year old MacBook and I was something I could do to put multitouch capibilities into the system.
    I am willing to do any hack in software or hardware even if it might break.
    Please include step by step instructions.
    I was also wondering if there was a way to overclock th intel gma 950 graphics built into the same Mac, allow the full 4 GB Memory to be used, and maybe overclock the 2.0 GHZ core 2 duo processor.
    Finally, is it possible to higher the screen res. more than 1280 by 800?

    No one here is going to tell you how to hack your computer.  That is not what this forum is for.  Look elsewhere on the internet to ask this question.

  • Overclocking and do those numbers mean?

    I overclocked my 2400+ to a 2.04Ghz which is nothing but i'd like to know could someone explain to me wat all the lingo means. Like multiplyers and 2.5.5.5. and all that crap. I've searched my ass off in the bios and have found no 2.5.5.5 and 12*166. !!!
    I know that 15*136 = 2.04Ghz for my 2400+XP, but how do i get something higher like 12*166=?? Where do i get the "12" in the bios?
    ALSO, is it possible for the CPU temp to be lower than the SYSTEM temp? The system temp is the temperature inside my case right?

    If you had done a search in the forum here you would see this is a very old issue regarding the temp problem and we've all been waiting for a BIOS release to fix it...
    I can tell you that it will be coming soon as our MSI contact says that it's being addressed properly (crosses fingers on this) right now...
    Reading the manual that comes with your MB is a good thing and usually very informative. Also going to MB mfg's sites and reading other board manuals can be even more informative, some of them actually explain what the lingo means...As far as teaching you the lingo on how to setup a BIOS and "What does it all mean" I can tell you what it all means but without in depth discussion of how it has an effect on the hardware that it controls in your machine it's probly take me a few hours...which I doubt I'm going to do over the internet via a forum...
    There are many resources out on the internet that you can get the info from...http://www.google.com is the best technical, if not overall, search engine in existance on the internet IMHO and if you took one of those headers such as SPD or AGP Aperture and typed it in the search box you'd probly find the answers to your questions...now telling you what your EXACT settings should be is not as straightforward as you may think either...every configuration has similarities and differences based upon the hardware in each box and few home built systems are exactly alike...different makes of HD's, RAM, CPU's, Chipsets etc...all come into play when making these settings and many times alot of us do experimentation in order to find that "Sweet Spot" for any particular build. I'm not even going to go into the topic of Hardware Parametric Differences...
    So you see there is so much info that we'd have to teach you it'd boggle your mind...do some searches out there and read some articles, someone out there has taken that time to convey the info for the new builders out there...
    Bonz 8)

Maybe you are looking for