[P67A-C45 B3]About overclocking and the frequency

Hello there, i just flash the BIOS to the Least version[10-04-11 one], and my CPU always working on 16X104.8[my setting is 42X104.8]. And the voltage is jumping from 0.95 to 1.375 [my setting is auto]
And if i run some program, it will goes up to 4402Mhz , this phenomenon never happen before i update the BIOS. Is there anything change in the new BIOS or is my setting is wrong?
My CPU is i7-2600K,PSU is Corsair GS600

As HU16E replied, all seems correct. Voltages are right in the ball park. Personally I would advise to stick to a 100 BCLK and rather increase the multi to 44. There are enough articles out there warning against increasing the BCLK to 104 or beyond.

Similar Messages

  • MOVED: [P67A-C45 B3]About overclocking and the frequency

    This topic has been moved to Overclockers & Undervolting & Modding Corner.
    https://forum-en.msi.com/index.php?topic=154190.0

    As HU16E replied, all seems correct. Voltages are right in the ball park. Personally I would advise to stick to a 100 BCLK and rather increase the multi to 44. There are enough articles out there warning against increasing the BCLK to 104 or beyond.

  • Firefox will open 4 or 5 tabs fine, but then will not load any further websites after those first 4 or 5, or allow you to refresh one of those first tabs -- including about:config and the addon page

    Firefox 5 worked fine. I installed Firefox 7, and when I ran it, tabs would just say "connecting to..." and hang. Restarting did not help. Websites open fine in IE and Chrome. Disabled all firewalls and antivirus, did not help. Uninstalled and reinstalled Firefox 5, everything worked fine again. This was using Vista 64-bit.
    Upgraded to Windows 7, uninstalled Firefox 5, installed Firefox 7, had same problem. Uninstalled Firefox 7 completely (including the profile information, I saved that information in another folder), restarted computer, and installed Firefox 7 using a completely clean profile. Did not install any add-ons, checked to make sure all plug-ins were up-to-date, and updated plugins.
    Now when I start Firefox, I can load 3 or 4 or 5 tabs fine -- after those first few tabs are open, I cannot open or refresh any other tabs -- including about:config and the add-on manager -- I have to restart Firefox. The hangup doesn't appear to be related to what websites I am attempting to open, but it looks like the number is the problem. I have run through all of the FAQ procedures, including changing the max number of network connections to 48, and the problem does not seem to go away.
    As a side note, I had this same problem when I tried to go from version 5 to version 6 as well. Version 5 is the most recent version that worked on my system.

    Can you try Aurora - download it from http://www.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/channel/
    And let us know how it works.

  • What's this I hear about Gmail and the iPhone?

    I have a gmail account with my iphone. I opened up a thread a few days ago saying something about gmail and the iphone (I didn't get to read the thread though) making it sound like the emails would get to my phone faster or something.
    Anyone know what I'm talking about?

    what you are talking about is called "pull", the phone pulls new messages every 15 minutes.
    in "push" mode if someone sends you an email it is pushed to your phone instantly, you don't have to wait up to 15 minutes for it to show up.
    you can find information about "push" vs. "pull" email on the internet (google works well for searching for information), wikipedia is especially handy:
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Push_e-mail
    and here is info about gmail push:
    http://googlemobile.blogspot.com/2009/09/google-sync-now-with-push-gmail-support .html

  • 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 )

  • P67A-C45 doesn't effectively change the vcore on bios

    Well another bug found on the P67A-C45 bios 1.5
    you can try to change the vcore, the bios says that it has changed, then you reboot, come back and the actual vcore still always on 1.208. You load windows, get to command centre and you get 1.2v
    Really frustrating to encouter so many basic problems with this board...

    Quote from: Mike on 23-January-11, 23:13:35
    Good that 1.7 seems to resolve the issue.
    it improved oc as well, some new features added to fine tune. 1.7 is way better than 1.5 for oc.

  • 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%.

  • About Dashboard and the Widgets.

    Hi everyone, I am looking for a clear explanation about memory usage and the dashboard items: the checkbox, the - sign.
    The Gidget Manager says that "uncheck widgets to disable them", so I do that, but the widgets always came back.
    I was wondering, how much resources of the computer the dashboard consumes?, I like widgets, but I have only 512 MB of RAM, and whant to squeeze as much power as I can. And don't put things that consumes resources, and stay there, doing nothing.
    If anyone could give me a tip, I will appretiate.
    Thanks from argentina,
    Pablo

    This question is easy enough to answer simply by looking at the process list in the Activity Viewer. You can find the Activity Viewer in the Utilities folder.

  • Confused about XPostFacto and the 8GB Limit - Please help

    Hi all,
    I've been running XPostFacto 4.0 on my Apple G3 Desktop (Rev C, 640MB Ram, 533 Mhz G4 OWC CPU upgrade) for sometime and is running great.
    But I have a question about the 8GB rule.
    This computer only runs off of a Seritek SATA card. There is a 35 GB Raptor drive on it, the first 7.81 GB is the 10.3.9 drive, and rest is for applications and files.
    I added a 160 GB Hitachi drive to the SATA card that I moved from my G4 MDD computer. It already has 3 partitions: 30 GB for 10.3.9, 10GB for OS9, and 115 GB for audio production files.
    If I wanted to boot off the Hitachi drive, would I have to re-format and create a 8 GB partition?
    As is, if I try to boot off the drive I just added, XPostFacto tries to synchronize the files, then it invariably crashes.
    I tried reading the manual again, but I get confused about the Mac OS X Installer and the 8GB rule, and so on.
    Thanks!

    i wound up erasing the partition on the transferred drive and carboncopycloning the beige's OS X drive to it...and now the transferred drive is booting ok!
    now, i'm thinking of copying the whole raptor drive over and re-partitioning the raptor drive (strangely, the raptor appears with about 9 partitions on Disk Utility, though the only two that i created are clickable...wonder if the OS sees this drive as something like scsi).
    this is a little asides the point, but on my MDD, the 7200 hitachi seemed to test as "faster" than the 10000rpm raptor in most categories. would the 7200 drive infact be better for OS style-tasks?
    Powerbook Alum 15 G4, MDD Dual 867 Mhz, Beige Minitower G3 Mac OS X (10.3.9)

  • Using Learn About FireFox and the 'Markers' disappeared never to return?

    Downloaded and installed FF4 for Mac
    Elected to ‘Learn about FireFox’, the browser complete with the Markers and dotted track/order to access line was displayed.
    Hit the first Marker and the relevant info window displayed.
    Hit the next Marker and then was distracted by another link and hit that.
    Returning (back button probably) to the learning session found all the Markers had disappeared.
    Tried various things to get the Markers to reappear but no luck so far.
    I did not restart FF4 but surely this should not be necessary?
    I will do this now but think this needs attention.
    Cheers, NSN
    EDIT: From the links obtained via a Google, I followed the most prominent to Mozilla.com and the info lead me to believe I was downloading FF4. I see this is not so!

    Unfortunately I tried that and it didn't work. Thanks for the help though. I tried to uninstall and it said I couldn't because the file is corrupt or something, but I think I finally got it uninstalled and/or deleted or whatever, but now I try to reinstall/download it again from the beginning and I can't. No matter what I do I can not get Firefox working again. No matter how many times I try to redownload it. Any other suggestions?

  • HT4878 Why is this data chart Timeline multi colored (in About/Storage) and the external drive is only pink?

    1. When viewing the Storage Timeline for my Macbook and the External Drive for the Time Machine backup instead of multi-colored bars the data is only showing a one pink one. Is that because it is all "backup" on the external? 2. Is the discrepancy in size the OS being left out? Thanks.

    Time Machine makes full backups of the hard drive. If you want to change this, you can open System Preferences > Time Machine > Options, and add excluded items. However, I recommend you to keep backing up the whole drive, so you will be able to restore the whole backup in case of a hard disk failure

  • K8N Neo2 question about overclocking and sata ports 1 & 2

    Hi guys,
    I know that when overclocking, sata ports 1 & 2 cannot be locked like sata ports 3 & 4, and therefore hard drives on ports 1 & 2 can be corrupted.  However, I would like to understand what is failing when the unlocked ports get overclocked.  Is it the motherboard that makes mistakes or is it the drive?  Since the ports on the K8N Neo2 are Sata 150 (correct me if i'm wrong), would buying a sata 300 drive be able to survive overclocking?  Also, I would like to know the effect of overclocked sata ports on dvd burners as opposed to hard drives.  I am looking to buy two new Dvd drives/burners for this board and I would like to avoid buying IDE again.
    So, can anyone answer the above questions in detail?
    Thanks,
    Steven

    Quote from: SteveH647 on 24-September-09, 04:39:34
    But is it the HDD itself that fails at the higher frequency?  Or is it the HDD controller on the motherboard that fails?  What about DVD drives?  And what if the HDD is SATA 300 instead of SATA 150?
    Quote
    But is it the HDD itself that fails at the higher frequency?
    Yes.
    Quote
    Or is it the HDD controller on the motherboard that fails?
    No
    Quote
    What about DVD drives?
    Can't tell you, haven't maked such experiments.
    Quote
    And what if the HDD is SATA 300 instead of SATA 150?
    It will not change anything.

  • MOVED: K8N Neo2 question about overclocking and sata ports 1 & 2

    This topic has been moved to Overclockers & Modding Corner.
    https://forum-en.msi.com/index.php?topic=130785.0

    Quote from: SteveH647 on 24-September-09, 04:39:34
    But is it the HDD itself that fails at the higher frequency?  Or is it the HDD controller on the motherboard that fails?  What about DVD drives?  And what if the HDD is SATA 300 instead of SATA 150?
    Quote
    But is it the HDD itself that fails at the higher frequency?
    Yes.
    Quote
    Or is it the HDD controller on the motherboard that fails?
    No
    Quote
    What about DVD drives?
    Can't tell you, haven't maked such experiments.
    Quote
    And what if the HDD is SATA 300 instead of SATA 150?
    It will not change anything.

  • Have you heard about "Softpedia" and the program "Burn"?

    I ran across this site (Softpedia) from a Leo Laporte mac news podcast.
    I have a CRT imac and have an external CD/DVD burner. I can play DVD's and CD's from this and have even burned CD's.
    Have you heard about this site? Any good/bad news I should know about them?
    I have upgraded my hard drive so I have over 100 GB of space, I’m running system 10.3. 500 megs of ram.
    I know I don’t have toast, but may want to try burning a DVD, will Burn work? Have you Heard anything about this program. Free sounds good to me! But is it too good to be true?
    http://www.softpedia.com/reviews/mac/Kiwi-Fruitware-Burn-Review-44220.shtml
    http://burn-osx.sourceforge.net/

    Haven't heard about them . I use Disk Burner from centromedia ( http://www.centromedia.com/en/products/discburner/index.html ) that along with Patchburn ( http://www.patchburn.de/download.html ) . Patchburn I have because of the drive wouldn't be recognized without it ( came from an old HP pc ) Both are free . Disk Burner works great with iTunes , iMovie , iPhoto ,... it blends itself well with the OS just like it came with the system . Good luck.

  • Trying to change the cache size of FF3.6 from 75meg to a larger size, it only applies on a per session basis. i check the about:config and the changes have applied but when i restart FF it has reset itself to 75 :(

    as per the question, tried to up the cache from 75meg to 300meg but it resets after i restart firefox, have tried to change to various cache sizes but to no avail.
    -=EDIT=-
    it must be something to do with the profile, as when i set up a new profile in the manager, the cache size problem no longer appears. but now, how to repair my profile

    ok, nothing in that text file helped but the original file that it was based on pointed me in the direction that it might be an extension. The only extensions i have are NoScript and FasterFox Lite version....
    I have now traced the fault to lie with FasterFox... if you are not familiar with fasterfox it speeds up internet connections in firefox... several of the options are presets... but when i selected custom it gave me the option of a cache setting, which was set to 75megs.
    I have now changed that cache setting in fasterfox to 300 Megs and it is now persistant in firefox on restart.
    hopefully this information will be helpful to other people in the future that suffer the same problem.
    Thanks for your help TonyE, its greatly appreciated

Maybe you are looking for