[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: overclocking the cache?

T. Weyergraf (kirk@colinet.de) wrote:

> IMHO, overclocking a 21164(a) is probably not a very good idea in the first place.
> It's got a fairly large on-die cache that - given the manufacturing process - would
> create a severe thermal problem of the chip itself.

I agree, but see below...

> I was able to overclock some of my 164LXen with 533 21164a to 600Mhz with reliable
> results, but switched back to 533 Mhz due to the above thoughts.

Often the 533MHz 21164 processors were exactly the same as the 600MHz
varitiy. The same _sometimes_ goes for the 500MHz processors, but not
always. From what I remember (which could be fuzzy or plain wrong) is
that the ones clocked at 500MHz were processors that failed to operate
under certain conditions at 533MHz. I personally have overclocked a
21064 from 166MHz to 200Mhz for about a year and breifly tried it at
233MHz (day or so) but was afraid it would end up as a puddel in the
bottom of the case... I currently have my 533MHz 21164 overclocked to
600MHz for more then a year and it's fine. I can wrap my fingers
around the heatsink and it is cool to the touch (not hot, not
even warm, but cool). So I believe it to be ok overclocked. I've built
dozens of kernels for it and countless packages for Debian without
finding a single error.


Attachment: pgpIrgM75__6L.pgp
Description: PGP signature

Reply to: