TechSpot

A8N32-SLI Overclocking

By NFSFAN
Dec 6, 2007
Topic Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. Hi all, I know I have not posted in a while here, mainly due to being very busy. I just built a new computer with a A8N32-SLI motherboard, an AMD Opteron 180, with a BFG GeForce 8800GT, and a OCZ 620W PSU. I was wondering if there is a possibility of reaching a 3.0GHz overclock on an Opteron 180, which runs at 2.4 GHz stock. I have a watercooling system, which is quite good, it kept my old Pentium 4 3.4 GHz EE below 42 Celsius at load.
    I have done some research on the internet, and came up with some interesting results, many of which I considered trying. I know that the multiplier is locked on the CPU to 12. If I up the FSB from 200 to 250, and bring the RAM down to 333mhz, then i can reach 3.0ghz, and exactly 400mhz on my ram, which it is rated to run at.
  2. Cinders

    Cinders TechSpot Chancellor Posts: 1,313   +12

    There is a fair chance you could reach 3.0, but you'd really need an excellent water cooling system to be able to do that. You need to set the FSB to 230-231 to reach 3GHz. At 250 your processor would be at 3.25GHz which would probably be way to high.

    OOPS I'm wrong. I thought I read your processor was clocked at 2.6 GHz and had a multiplier of 13. Sorry! Yes you are correct, but your memory would actually be clocked at 207.5MHz or 415MHz
  3. Mictlantecuhtli

    Mictlantecuhtli TS Evangelist Posts: 4,916   +9

    Well, considering I got Opteron 165, which runs at 1.8 GHz stock, to 2.8 GHz (FSB from 200 to 314) with its stock heatsink, I'd say it's possible, unless the faster Opterons have significantly less overclocking headroom.
  4. NFSFAN

    NFSFAN TS Rookie Topic Starter Posts: 340

    Which settings should i fiddle with to achieve a 3.0ghz overclock?
  5. Daveskater

    Daveskater Banned Posts: 2,031

  6. NFSFAN

    NFSFAN TS Rookie Topic Starter Posts: 340

    Well so far so good. I got the Opteron running stable at 2.8GHz. I set the voltage at 1.52v, and I will try lower right now. Only thing that is scareing me, is that the CPU temperature is at 59 Celsius, but Core 1 is at 85 Celsius, while core 2 is at 55 Celsius. But overall is 59 Celsius? I also find it funny that when I stress with OCCT, the temperature on core 1 ramps up by like 20 Celsius in 1 second from what it is at when it is idle. Is this normal? Also I have a temperature monitor from my watercooler, which is attatched to the base of the CPU waterblock, and this is reporting currently 40.2 Celsius. I am sort of confused here, I am not sure which one to trust; the motherboard temp, or the watercooler's temperature.

    EDIT: Now running with 1.47v on the core and tems dropped a bit. Overall 57 Celsius after 30min OCCT, Core 1 Max: 80 Celsius, Core 2 Max: 68 Celsius. This is at 2.8GHz. But my watercooler is only reporting 41.1 Celsius now. Also my case has a temperature monitor too, and that is reporting 40 Celsius. My RAM is running at 432MHz, with timings 2-3-2-6. RAM is stable no problem there, and the CPU also seems stable ATM. Will update as soon as I play more with it. I am happy so far with 2.8 GHz, and I might aim at 3.0GHz in the future, but so far I don't need an extra 200MHz.
    I have yet to try any games on my computer, I just built it, and so far it is much faster than my Pentium 4 Setup was at 3.85 GHz. Also the video card 8800GT seems to idle at a good temperature of 52 Celsius, other people reported in the 60s. Sorry for making you guys read so much, but I am truly excited, as this is my 3rd computer, and the ones before have been INTELs, so I went with an AMD for change, and it is just amazing.
  7. NFSFAN

    NFSFAN TS Rookie Topic Starter Posts: 340

    Are these temperatures too high? I am very scared that something might happen. My watercooler reads 41-43 Celsius load. On Everest, the overall cpu temp is reported as 59 Celsius, Core 1 at 80-81 Celsius, Core 2 at 60-63 Celsius this is all at load btw. I am starting to worry, that there might be something wrong, that cpu is going to die. I need someone to tell me ASAP if i should run the computer or not. The waterblock is seated properly, and I applied about 1 grain of rice of AS5 on the middle of the cpu, then I took the waterblock, and rotated it about 5-10 Degrees left and right, as mentioned on the AS5 instruction manual. I have 2 sensors on the cpu. One from the CASE, the other from my watercooling system. Both of them report around 39-43 at load, but never higher. ANy help would be greatly appreciated
  8. Daveskater

    Daveskater Banned Posts: 2,031

    To make sure that it isn't your CPU at 80C, go into your BIOS and look at the CPU temp there. It will have CPU Temp written next to it, so if it has 80C next to it then your temp is very high, if it says 50C then you'll be ok but it is a tad warm, nothing to really worry about though.
  9. NFSFAN

    NFSFAN TS Rookie Topic Starter Posts: 340

    Yes, in the bios it is reporting around 39 Celsius on idle. It is about on par with the watercooling reading. But what i find weird, is that everest reads overall temperature about the same. Only difference is that it shows Core 1 and Core 2 very high.
  10. Daveskater

    Daveskater Banned Posts: 2,031

    Going by what the numbers say, it sounds like the GPU is Core 2.

    What Core 1 is I'm not sure, but if it's your HDD then it's already gotten hot enough to cause irreparable damage and data loss. So it shouldn't be that ;) That should come under a different sensor name anyway.
  11. NFSFAN

    NFSFAN TS Rookie Topic Starter Posts: 340

    No, the gpu is listed with its own temperature it is an 8800GT and it is idling currently at 49 Celsius. When i run everest, under cpu, it shows three temperatures. CPU Temperature: 58 Celsius Core #1: 80 Celsius Core #2: 65 Celsius. This is under load by the way. I am skeptical about trusting the motherboard sensor, because both temperature sensors, from the watercooling, and the case, both show around a max of 41 Celsius under load. I think I would be more inclined to trust the temperature sensor from under the waterblock, since that would get the temperatures directly? No?
     
Topic Status:
Not open for further replies.


Add New Comment

TechSpot Members
Login or sign up for free,
it takes about 30 seconds.
You may also...


Get complete access to the TechSpot community. Join thousands of technology enthusiasts that contribute and share knowledge in our forum. Get a private inbox, upload your own photo gallery and more.