On Tue, Feb 17, 2004 at 01:11:04AM -0800, Nano Nano wrote:
> [2] 53C will be reported on the heatsink edge when 61C is reported by
> the CPU core to the bios. The difference is less at lower temps.
...as one would expect.
Suggest that using the CPU core sensor would be a better idea than the
he
Nano Nano wrote:
[1] 230 mhz bus, 14% increase. Kernel compile time went from 6:11 to
5:20, a 14% increase. It's worth the trouble.
So, you have a 14% performance boost, but you can only use it 75% of the
time. 1.14*0.75=86%...
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
On Tue, 2004-02-17 at 04:11, Nano Nano wrote:
> I've overclocked my 3.2Ghz to 3.68Ghz with proper but extremely loud CPU
> fan. [1]. My goal is to lever let my heatsink temp. exceed 53
> celsius [2].
Cool.
> [1] 230 mhz bus, 14% increase. Kernel compile time went from 6:11 to
> 5:20, a 14% i
On Tuesday 17 February 2004 15:43, Nano Nano wrote:
> Now I can turn the fan down to "quite quiet" (3000 RPMs) and compile hte
> kernel at 46C (before it was 55C). So I can sleep peacefully.
I don't know what Pentium4 chips are rated to run at, but I think you might be
over paranoid about the te
On Tue, Feb 17, 2004 at 02:31:35PM +0100, Christian Schnobrich wrote:
> As for 'unexpected' tasks, look at /etc/cron.* (daily, monthly, etc).
Will do.
> As I understand it, you sleep almost on top of the machine and want it
> to keep running 24/7. Why you want to do this is none of my business,
>
On Die, 2004-02-17 at 10:11, Nano Nano wrote:
> I've overclocked my 3.2Ghz to 3.68Ghz with proper but extremely loud CPU
> fan. [1]. My goal is to lever let my heatsink temp. exceed 53
> celsius [2].
[...]
> I can sleep near a quiet PC and be confident that it will never go above
> the mid-40s a
On Tue, Feb 17, 2004 at 01:11:04AM -0800, Nano Nano wrote:
> [1] 230 mhz bus, 14% increase. Kernel compile time went from 6:11 to
> 5:20, a 14% increase. It's worth the trouble.
A separate subthread to preemptively answer the nay-sayers: I
benchmarked it non-overclocked vs. overclocked with th
On Tue, Feb 17, 2004 at 01:11:04AM -0800, Nano Nano wrote:
> xscreensaver-gl is the first to go. I really need to know: what sorts
> of tasks could "just run by themselves" that would likely lead to heavy
> CPU loads? (aside from the obvious like [EMAIL PROTECTED])
In my effort to be brief, I
I've overclocked my 3.2Ghz to 3.68Ghz with proper but extremely loud CPU
fan. [1]. My goal is to lever let my heatsink temp. exceed 53
celsius [2].
It idles at 36C. Ordinary load generates temps in the low 40s: disk and
network load -> not much, bzipping tar etc. -> relatively more. Heavy
l
9 matches
Mail list logo
