|
|||||||
 |
|
|
LinkBack | Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
Rating: 
|
Display Modes |
01-19-2001, 10:06 AM
|
#1 |
|
Philosophical Computing Nutcase
Join Date: Sep 2000
Location: Australia
Posts: 870
|
What would be the maximum that I could push this processor to.
I have a P233 heatsink and fan, and the processor is cool running to the touch (my fingers get cold on the sink). I *will* play with this processor but if anyone has a few clues then they would be welcome. |
|
|
|
01-19-2001, 11:11 AM
|
#2 |
|
Member (13 bit)
Join Date: Apr 1999
Location: Now in Phoenix, AZ. Where next? Only 8 states left to see.
Posts: 4,661
|
Hey Kraken,
Most P-200`s will run at 233-250. Due to the core size, its upper limit will be near 250. Your last FSB option is 83mhz which can cause problems with many UDMA drives. This is also the reason why the P1 was never released by Intel at speeds exceeding 233mhz.
__________________
2 goldfish were discussing Mythology. The discussion ended when a goldfish replied: "There MUST be a God, who changes the water?" |
|
|
|
|
01-19-2001, 11:21 AM
|
#3 |
|
Philosophical Computing Nutcase
Join Date: Sep 2000
Location: Australia
Posts: 870
|
So Toaster
Is the P200 multiplyier locked? I cannot go beyond 75MHz with this board. (I will upgrade system before a board transplant( beat damn you beat)). Just looking for 250 or so to satisfy my curiosity. Thanks for the reply, Lets burn out this system so that I have a valid excuse. Happy birthday to me.. [Edited by kraken on 01-19-2001 at 11:30 AM] |
|
|
|
|
01-19-2001, 01:50 PM
|
#4 |
|
Red-eyed Moderator
Staff
Premium Member
Join Date: Dec 1999
Location: Regina, Saskatchewan, Canada
Posts: 17,525
|
It depends on how old your 200MMX is. Some of the early ones were not multiplier locked, some were, all you can do is try.
__________________
-At Ford, quality is job #1, job #2 is making them explode. ~Norm MacDonald, SNL News -Switching to Glide..Balancing in my head..inside of me... taking the glide path instead. |
|
|
|
|
01-20-2001, 08:43 AM
|
#5 |
|
Philosophical Computing Nutcase
Join Date: Sep 2000
Location: Australia
Posts: 870
|
Will crank it up tommorow and see what happens.
|
|
|
|
|
01-20-2001, 12:35 PM
|
#6 |
|
Member (13 bit)
Join Date: Apr 1999
Location: Now in Phoenix, AZ. Where next? Only 8 states left to see.
Posts: 4,661
|
As Hal suggests, Intel wasn`t too keen on overclockers at this point and made several CPUs that wern`t "locked".
Still, the core size will be the limiting factor. You might get 250 and should you get this figure, consider yourself lucky. The 233 was the final implementation of the "socket7" CPU for Intel. Intel focused on the P-Pro and the PII beyond the "legacy" pentiums. Intel produced a few 300mhz "socket7" pentiums but they were never shipped because they had rather poor throughput due to the onboard L1 cache running at 2/3 clock and a core size that just wasn`t solid enough for production. Enter the P-Pro and the PII. Then, the Cyrix M1/M2 were the real contender as these CPUs had greater throughput then the "legacy" pentiums. Also, then FPU capabilities were not of big concearn but the efficiency of the M1/M2 was. Out came 3D applications and the fate of the Cyrix was sealed. Still a fast chip but lacking a suitable FPU, the Cyrix slipped from fame rather quickly. Cyrix, IDT, and a few other CPU makers suscumbed to the might of Intel monitary reserves and marketing. |
|
|
|
|
01-21-2001, 06:15 AM
|
#7 |
|
Philosophical Computing Nutcase
Join Date: Sep 2000
Location: Australia
Posts: 870
|
I never had a problem with the cyrix for general apps and day to day use. It is only that they cannot play games that led me to the change to the Pentium.
The cranking will have to wait until I can get a bigger heatsink fot my power regulators. Its just getting too hot. |
|
|
|
|
| Bookmarks |
| Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
| Display Modes | Rate This Thread |
|
|
Linear Mode
