Help OVERCLOCK old system

[Sparxxx]

Hello,
I want to make an overclock on my system but it doesn't work pretty well
I have pretty old CPU and MAINBOARD:
CPU: AMD 2100+ (Palomino Core), 1.73Ghz, FSB 266
MB: K7T266 Pro2-RU , FSB 266
DDR: 2*512 Corsair TWINX1024-3200C2PRO
I tried to higher the FSB but it doesn't work, it freezes.
I tried also to higher VCORE but still can't get too much, 2-3 FSB and sometimes it freezes.
Is this the maximum i can get from my CPU, considering 2100+ was the last from PALOMINO series?
Thanks

[hightower]

I'm sorry I can't be much help to you, since I don't know a great deal about AMD overclocking, except it's somewhat harder than overclocking Intel. You are either lucky or unlucky with those AMD cpu's - there's a big difference between chips. Did you also make sure your motherboard BIOS is the latest? This isn't exactly the right place for overclocking, so I'm sure the guys over at www.ocforums.com can help you out. You got yourself some nice ram there, get a new nf4 motherboard and 939 a64 venice cpu and you'll be flying.

[Sparxxx]

ok thank you very much... as for the new cpu and mainboard... i have no money right now

[Natronomonas]

since I don't know a great deal about AMD overclocking, except it's somewhat harder than overclocking Intel.

Sorry Hightower, but I'm going to have to take issue with your comment.... you obviously don't know a lot about overclocking in general, because if you did you'd know it's no harder or easier than overclocking Intel...
In fact, I would say more AMD motherboards have support for overclocking features than Intel, as AMD has leaned toward the enthusiast market for some time now. Mobos like the Abit NF-7 didn't just come out of nowhere.

As always, it helps to have done your research and to know where the CPU came in the scheme of things - the last of a generation and/or first in a new process is rarely going to overclock as well as one that is initially clocked lower but should have some headroom. As well, you have to choose your other components carefully (mobo + ram) to ensure you can achieve your overclock and not be limited by factors other than the CPU.

To the OP - it could well be your motherboard that has limited the overclock, not the CPU - can you raise the voltage of the chipset? It is very rare to get a CPU that won't overclock even a couple of mhz, especially when extra voltage is added, especially if the temperature is still reasonable (<50-60C)

[hightower]

Oh really? With Intel, I just raise my FSB. I have not heard of a 630 chip that didn't go straight to 240 with standard vcore - it is just as good as 2.4c northwood were. 600mhz free - thank you Intel. Also, with Intel you don't need to think about adjusting HTT or 1/2t ram modes. You should have read what I wrote - AMD is much more a question of luck with the chips. Most of them is quite good for modest overclocking in the range of 200-300mhz. I did have a 3200+ winnie that I couldn't get stable with just 200mhz extra - yes I did try everything. That just sucked. It was the first BIOS revision of a8n-sli, maybe the latest BIOS revisions would have helped. Needless to say, it went back.

[hightower]

However, with that said, I'm no overclocking guru! I'm not saying AMD can't be overclocked. I don't like to raise my vcore for example. So for me, it's all about getting as much out of the box without raising NB voltage and so on, and for that I think Intel is easier. But sure, you need a working pci lock and you also need the right chipset for the 6xx series - 915 won't do the trick. I would never own an Athlon XP, for me it's first now AMD with 64bit and dual channel started to be somewhat interesting, and I'm looking forward to dualcore competition, I do think the Smithfield sucks right now.

[alglove]

Is this the maximum i can get from my CPU, considering 2100+ was the last from PALOMINO series?

Probably so, for just the reason you have stated. Your memory should certainly not be a bottleneck, and the motherboard chipset is most likely more tolerant of overclocking than 2-3 MHz. Trying to overclock this particular CPU will be like squeezing blood from a turnip.

[Natronomonas]

Oh really? With Intel, I just raise my FSB.

Same with the AthlonXP series... which had the added advantage of no multiplier locks for some time. If you want the added performance of on-die memory controllers etc, one extra bus to worry about isn't too bad.

I have not heard of a 630 chip that didn't go straight to 240 with standard vcore - it is just as good as 2.4c northwood were. 600mhz free - thank you Intel. AMD is much more a question of luck with the chips

How many thousands of people bought a 2500+ Barton and upped the FSB from 166 to 200 for a 3200+? Thank you AMD. Where is the luck there? The 2500+ was the lowest clocked, most advanced core revision of the time - overclocking was a cakewalk.
Of course the 630 scaled so well... the part is one of the lowest clocked in a family that's rated to 3.8ghz!

I did have a 3200+ winnie that I couldn't get stable with just 200mhz extra - yes I did try everything. That just sucked. It was the first BIOS revision of a8n-sli, maybe the latest BIOS revisions would have helped. Needless to say, it went back.

You returned a CPU because you couldn't overclock it enough! : )

This post may come across as pro-AMD, but I actually use both manufacturers. I'm just making the point that overall, there is really no difference from an overclocking perspective. Each company will have chips that overclock brilliantly and those that are... disappointing.

[hightower]

You're right about barton 2500 - My cousin got one of those (he's AMD-pro - but like i wrote, athlon XP never caught my attention for real). You're not the only one who laugh at my AMD "i returned it because it couldn't overclock well" but I couldn't help it when I were used to having a [email protected]. AMD64 seems to me to be more of a question of luck rather than that barton, how far it will go. But most people don't overclock, and I do think if you don't do that, then AMD64 is the better buy and have been so since the preshott series was launched (unless you do massive video encoding) and AMD64 is what I recommend to my friends, who's still scared of overclocking for some reason..

[Gerbil]

Also, with Intel you don't need to think about adjusting HTT or 1/2t ram modes.

You don't have to worry about them. You can increase the FSB alone if you want. Since when has OC'ing NOT involved thinking? You have to have an understanding of the concept and of the limitations of your hardware. OC'ing with AMD CPUs is no problem. I've heard that most Venice owners are clocking 3000/3200+ chips up to 2500-2700MHz on air. That's not bad. Did you ignore the last two years of socket A chips? Like Natronomonas pointed out, most Barton 2500+ CPUs OC'ed straight to 200MHz without a hitch. The mobile chips were even better, with most users pushing the FSB far beyond 200MHz.

Sparxxx: Palominos don't overclock very well, and neither does that old chipset. Better cooling might help (slightly), but if you're going to spend any money, you'd be better off saving it to invest in a new board and CPU.

[ronrem]

The focus here tends toward low noise computers. The die size is related to both thermal efficiency and power,and a Palomino is a few generations back in that regard. Basically,a Palomino STOCK is hotter than a Venice which is far more powerful. OC a palomino and you get quite a cooker,relatively that needs more fans/rpms. and so ceases to be even relatively quiet.

If the Speed/budget issues are the big priority-there are many sites where Overclocking is the main theme,and the noise stuff is hardly considered.

Several makers,Foxconn,ECS,have mobos that are fairly cheap,will accomodate a Venice 3000. You can have a silent stock speed venice thats more powerful than you can ever make that Palomino. Choose your priority.