Proposed System

reality check....first your saying that everyone is going to have those options in their bios 2nd even if they did all they would
have to do is have an Intel chip, OEM cooler and the machine runs for 4 years. There is absolutely no need for the average user to
have to go through any of what your saying to have a long lasting, cool running, stable machine. Can it be done? yes is what your
saying true? most of it....the big question is WHY? I have abused My PIII in the garage-90+f ambiant temps, stock cooler, filthy
inside
4 years so far......


"kony" wrote in message ...
On Sun, 12 Oct 2003 04:37:48 GMT, "JAD" wrote:


You've lost your mind


Nope. Do you understand the relationship between voltage and heat
production, energy usage? Where do you think that energy comes from?
The motherboard's onboard regulation circuits, including the
capacitors. It's not only Taiwanese or other defective capacitors
that fail, they all do eventually, that rate depending on the stresses
on them... Talk to someone from a large volume PC shop, most have
plenty of systems coming in DOA... I get dead boards from a a few
regularly, replace the caps, they work like new again.

Yes you have if you think i'm going to spend money on a cpu and the turn it down so it doesnt overheat....

Turn it down? Voltage reduction can occur without any underclocking.
The key is to choose the speed YOU want/need to run the CPU, and
giving it only enough voltage to retain stability at that speed, as
any additional voltage increase beyond that only serves to increase
heat output.

For example, earlier in this thread I mentioned a Palomino Athlon
XP1600 I had which was undervolted to 1.6V (from 1.75) and o'c to
1.6GHz.



Dave

Toady kill filed.....


"~misfit~" wrote in message ...
Top posting fixed.

"JAD" wrote in message
ink.net...
"kony" wrote in message
...
On Sat, 11 Oct 2003 00:55:16 GMT, "JAD" wrote:

Undervoltage not only decreases heat, it lessens wear on the
motherboard, uses less energy overall, including a slight bit less to
re-cool the room the system is in during the warmer months. Given
Intel's path towards even hotter CPUs I expect we'll see more and more
people undervolting their CPUs.


You've lost your mind


Nope. Do you understand the relationship between voltage and heat
production, energy usage? Where do you think that energy comes from?
The motherboard's onboard regulation circuits, including the
capacitors. It's not only Taiwanese or other defective capacitors
that fail, they all do eventually, that rate depending on the stresses
on them... Talk to someone from a large volume PC shop, most have
plenty of systems coming in DOA... I get dead boards from a a few
regularly, replace the caps, they work like new again.

Yes you have if you think i'm going to spend money on a cpu and the
turn it down so it doesnt overheat....

Your money, your choice.
--
~misfit~



---
Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.525 / Virus Database: 322 - Release Date: 9/10/2003

On Sun, 12 Oct 2003 20:04:33 +1300
"~misfit~" wrote:


"JAD" wrote in message
ink.net...
reality check....first your saying that everyone is going to have
those
options in their bios 2nd even if they did all they would
have to do is have an Intel chip, OEM cooler and the machine runs
for 4
years. There is absolutely no need for the average user to
have to go through any of what your saying to have a long lasting,
cool
running, stable machine. Can it be done? yes is what your
saying true? most of it....the big question is WHY? I have abused
My PIII
in the garage-90+f ambiant temps, stock cooler, filthy
inside
4 years so far......

Why do you have your PC in the garage? Mommy catch you masturbating in
front of the monitor one time too many?

plonk

--
~misfit~


---
Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.525 / Virus Database: 322 - Release Date: 9/10/2003




--
--
--John
Reply to jclarke at ae tee tee global dot net
(was jclarke at eye bee em dot net)

On Sun, 12 Oct 2003 07:20:50 GMT
kony wrote:

On Sun, 12 Oct 2003 05:57:57 GMT, "JAD" wrote:

reality check....first your saying that everyone is going to have
those options in their bios 2nd even if they did all they would have
to do is have an Intel chip, OEM cooler and the machine runs for 4
years. There is absolutely no need for the average user to have to go
through any of what your saying to have a long lasting, cool running,
stable machine. Can it be done? yes is what your saying true? most
of it....the big question is WHY? I have abused My PIII in the
garage-90+f ambiant temps, stock cooler, filthy inside
4 years so far......


I never claimed that everyone has these BIOS options. Anyone spec'ing
their own components can choose. I have presented yet another
possible reason to want these BIOS options, beyond just overclocking.

Even so, there are multiple other methods for adjusting voltage for
most any motherboard, just not as easily.

I certainly don't recommend that EVERYONE undervolt, only those
informed enough to make an intelligent decision, and still, it's a
decision. It is NOT the ultimate answer to anything, is only another
method to tweak a system, finely tune it, but also has real benefits
directly adressing one of the biggest problems facing Intel's high-end
and near-future desktop processors, that they create never-before-seen
amounts of heat, and more strain on other components like the power
supply.

Consider your PIII box... already 4 years running. A newer
motherboard built to the same price-point, grade of onboard
components, will not last as long, because the power usage went up...

And of course you can present statistics which demonstrate this
reduction in service life? No? How about some calculations? No? How
about a good white paper from a credible source? I thought not.

a bit like burning two candles, but one with a longer wick so it burns
hotter, faster. A new system bought today should have enough
performance to be viable for even longer than the PIII did/does,
possibly a LOT longer,

You assume that new applications which require more computing power will
not be developed.

except that it's lifespan isn't expected to
match, seems to be going DOWN compared to Coppermine boxes.

Evidence? Didn't think so.

In the past year or so I've seen QUITE a few posts about dead/dying
semi-modern systems... a lot more than back in the PIII days, and at a
greater rate than these (now older) PIII systems are failing today,
which is backwards, the older systems should be failing more often
being nearer the end of their lifespan.

Do you really believe that counting postings on USENET and comparing
with several years ago tells you anything about reliability trends? Or
did you even bother to count?

Dave


--
--
--John
Reply to jclarke at ae tee tee global dot net
(was jclarke at eye bee em dot net)

On Sun, 12 Oct 2003 09:17:03 GMT
(Thunder9) wrote:

On Fri, 10 Oct 2003 00:45:11 +0000, "J.Clarke"
wrote:

On Thu, 09 Oct 2003 22:41:00 GMT
kony wrote:

On 9 Oct 2003 10:12:09 -0700, (MikeW) wrote:


And what's this obsession with undervolting. I can see not
wanting to overclock, but if you run the chips as designed, you can
probably keep them cool enough without too much noise, with
intelligent case/cooling system design.

Why not undervolt? So long as it's not such a low voltage to
intruduce instability there's nothing but benefit to it... due to
the way Intel tiers their CPUs in voltage groups, almost all of 'em
but the early releases at the highest speeds (per core revision) can
run undervolted, even overclocked up to a point.

It's like overclocking I guess--some people do it because they can.
With passive coolers available for every processor currently on the
market though there's no need to do it to achieve a quiet machine
though.

But for my P4 2.4 GHz why go to all that trouble of making a huge home
made passive cooler when I can achieve my requirements with a nice low
noise fan and undervolting?

Why should I undervolt when I can achieve my requirements with a nice
slow fan and no undervolting?

Regards,
Thunder9



--
--
--John
Reply to jclarke at ae tee tee global dot net
(was jclarke at eye bee em dot net)

On Sun, 12 Oct 2003 09:25:40 GMT
(Thunder9) wrote:

On Fri, 10 Oct 2003 00:45:11 +0000, "J.Clarke"
wrote:

On Thu, 09 Oct 2003 22:41:00 GMT
kony wrote:

On 9 Oct 2003 10:12:09 -0700, (MikeW) wrote:


And what's this obsession with undervolting. I can see not
wanting to overclock, but if you run the chips as designed, you can
probably keep them cool enough without too much noise, with
intelligent case/cooling system design.

Why not undervolt? So long as it's not such a low voltage to
intruduce instability there's nothing but benefit to it... due to
the way Intel tiers their CPUs in voltage groups, almost all of 'em
but the early releases at the highest speeds (per core revision) can
run undervolted, even overclocked up to a point.

It's like overclocking I guess--some people do it because they can.
With passive coolers available for every processor currently on the
market though there's no need to do it to achieve a quiet machine
though.

Wrong. The need is based on the cost and weight of the passive
coolers compared to ease of undervolting along with a low noise fan.

It is customary to put all of your thoughts concerning a particular post
in a single response to that post.

Fine, forget passive coolers. Please explain why you are unable to cool
your 2.4 GHz P4 with an off-the-shelf heat sink and a Papst 8412NGL
without undervolting.

Regards,
Thunder9


--
--
--John
Reply to jclarke at ae tee tee global dot net
(was jclarke at eye bee em dot net)

"J.Clarke" wrote in message
...
On Sun, 12 Oct 2003 18:31:55 +1300
"~misfit~" wrote:


"J.Clarke" wrote in message
...
On Sun, 12 Oct 2003 13:08:57 +1300
"~misfit~" wrote:


"J.Clarke" wrote in message
...

snip a whole lot of J. Clarke's argument with a man who knows
his stuff

"Stability" is not the only issue. Are you completely sure that
calcuations performed on one of your undervolted systems are
accurate? If so, how did you determine this?

Prime95 torture-test. The widely accepted standard.

And how was that validated? What agency published the standard?

The agency of don't be a ****wit. It is the standard of system
tweakers and overclockers world-wide.

And you would trust your life to "the standard of system tweakers and
overclockers world-wide"? Goody.

Trust my life? What are you on man?

sigh But I bet you keep arguing. Always with questions, never with
facts.--

Can you say "shifting the burden of proof"?

Yes. I can say 'Supercalifragilisticxpealidocious' too.
--
~misfit~


---
Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.525 / Virus Database: 322 - Release Date: 9/10/2003

"JAD" wrote in message
ink.net...
"~misfit~" wrote in message
...
Top posting fixed.

"JAD" wrote in message
ink.net...
"kony" wrote in message
...
On Sat, 11 Oct 2003 00:55:16 GMT, "JAD"
wrote:

Undervoltage not only decreases heat, it lessens wear on the
motherboard, uses less energy overall, including a slight bit less
to
re-cool the room the system is in during the warmer months. Given
Intel's path towards even hotter CPUs I expect we'll see more and
more
people undervolting their CPUs.


You've lost your mind


Nope. Do you understand the relationship between voltage and heat
production, energy usage? Where do you think that energy comes
from?
The motherboard's onboard regulation circuits, including the
capacitors. It's not only Taiwanese or other defective capacitors
that fail, they all do eventually, that rate depending on the
stresses
on them... Talk to someone from a large volume PC shop, most have
plenty of systems coming in DOA... I get dead boards from a a few
regularly, replace the caps, they work like new again.

Yes you have if you think i'm going to spend money on a cpu and
the
turn it down so it doesnt overheat....

Your money, your choice.
--
Toady kill filed.....

LOL.
--
~misfit~


---
Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.525 / Virus Database: 322 - Release Date: 9/10/2003

"JAD" wrote in message
ink.net...
reality check....first your saying that everyone is going to have those
options in their bios 2nd even if they did all they would
have to do is have an Intel chip, OEM cooler and the machine runs for 4
years. There is absolutely no need for the average user to
have to go through any of what your saying to have a long lasting, cool
running, stable machine. Can it be done? yes is what your
saying true? most of it....the big question is WHY? I have abused My PIII
in the garage-90+f ambiant temps, stock cooler, filthy
inside
4 years so far......

Why do you have your PC in the garage? Mommy catch you masturbating in front
of the monitor one time too many?
--
~misfit~


---
Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.525 / Virus Database: 322 - Release Date: 9/10/2003

On Sun, 12 Oct 2003 09:35:11 GMT
(Thunder9) wrote:

On Fri, 10 Oct 2003 08:58:01 +0000, "J.Clarke"
wrote:

On Fri, 10 Oct 2003 08:11:20 GMT
kony wrote:

On Fri, 10 Oct 2003 00:45:11 +0000, "J.Clarke"
wrote:

On Thu, 09 Oct 2003 22:41:00 GMT
kony wrote:

On 9 Oct 2003 10:12:09 -0700, (MikeW) wrote:


And what's this obsession with undervolting. I can see not
wanting to overclock, but if you run the chips as designed, you
can probably keep them cool enough without too much noise, with
intelligent case/cooling system design.

Why not undervolt? So long as it's not such a low voltage to
intruduce instability there's nothing but benefit to it... due
to the way Intel tiers their CPUs in voltage groups, almost all of
'em but the early releases at the highest speeds (per core
revision) can run undervolted, even overclocked up to a point.

It's like overclocking I guess--some people do it because they
can. With passive coolers available for every processor currently
on the market though there's no need to do it to achieve a quiet
machine though.


There aren't truely passive coolers available for AMD or Intel
though, they require a very dedicated fan, airflow, might as well be
considered active coolers with the fan simply moved or put to take
for multiple functions as with Dell ducted systems.

Well, actually passive coolers have been constructed for AMD CPUs.
And since "everybody knows" that "Intel runs cooler" there should be
no problem doing the same for an Intel.

Wrong. Just because passive coolers were constructed for AMD CPU's in
the past doesn't mean that passive coolers can easily be created for
the newer, hotter Intels (or AMDs).

Of course they can--add a couple of more heat pipes, use both sides of
the case instead of just one, . . .

Not off-the-shelf items but it has
been done.

Exactly the point of using alternative cooling solutions.

Uh, custom built passive cooling devices _are_ "alternative cooling
solutions".

Running a CPU or any other component out of spec is something you get
away with, not correction of an error on the part of the designers.
Trying to sell it as anything else does nobody a service.

Wrong. Trying to sell it as something else does thousands of people a
service.

In what way?

That's why, for example, motherboard designers allow
features like "automatic overclocking". They wouldn't provide such
features unless it was providing many people a useful service.

Reading comprehension a bit lacking? Is is your contention that running
a CPU outside the manufacturer's specified operating range is a normal
procedure and that a reseller selling machines so constructed without
informing the purchaser is behaving ethically and that such machines are
to be trusted with mission-critical tasks?

Hint--"x does nobody a service" is a different statement from "claiming
thus and so about x does nobody a service".

Regards,
Thunder9


--
--
--John
Reply to jclarke at ae tee tee global dot net
(was jclarke at eye bee em dot net)