cyclone3d wrote on 2021-10-10, 16:01:

It could still be something to do with instability. The on-die cache could be catching errors and correcting them.

Can this be prevented by the disabling the "L2 ECC cache checking" option in bios?

Yeah, and that should theoretically also give a bit of a performance boost as well.

Not sure if that setting is only going to affect the motherboard cache but I'm guessing that that is the case.

Thanks for the feedback.
Disabled on-board l2 cache, which basically acts as l3 really.
Same thing.
Something does not add up.

Also, what you mentioned early about videocards slowing down with extreme overclocking.
Can you expand on that ?
Never experienced such thing myself. In fact first time hear about such phenomenon.

Yeah, some video cards will seem ok at max "stable" overclock but the benchmark scores will go down.

Used to see this mentioned a decent amount in reviews though I don't have any specific ones on hand to point you towards.

The BIOS may be messing around with the ram timings etc when you call SetMul to change the multiplier, try setting multiplier to 6x and 5x with jumpers etc and run the benchmarks without running SetMul?

mobo has no listed jumpers config for 6x, but with 3 jumpers in place it is probably available. needs to be verified.

pshipkov wrote on 2021-10-12, 23:55:

mobo has no listed jumpers config for 6x, but with 3 jumpers in place it is probably available. needs to be verified.

2x is 6x for AMD chips.

I see.
Ok, jumpering the multiplier produced results that make sense.
So either setmul.exe does something else in addition to adjusting multiplier, or BIOS is quietly trying to be smart about.
Thanks.

pshipkov wrote on 2021-10-13, 06:50:

I see. Ok, jumpering the multiplier produced results that make sense. So either setmul.exe does something else in addition to ad […]
Show full quote

I see.
Ok, jumpering the multiplier produced results that make sense.
So either setmul.exe does something else in addition to adjusting multiplier, or BIOS is quietly trying to be smart about.
Thanks.

Glad to be of help, your problem rang a bell with me as I also use a 2013 in my Socket 7 rig. Cheers.

Also, what was the eventual score with 6x?

Thank you.

---

This is what i got so far:

K6-2+/550ACZ @672Mhz (112x6), default voltage
L1/L2/L3 caches enabled
Quadro2 Pro, Detonator3 7.58, graphics perf is CPU bound, OC the video adapter has no effect, moving to later GPUs has no effect.
System feels fully stable (inconclusive), but at 112x6 DRAM/CACHE timings cannot move an inch above their default values in BIOS.
I can get that 3D Mark 2000 number to ~3800 with compromised stability.

112x5.5 with tight cache/ram timings produces 3850 points without compromising stability.
Screenshot in my previous post.

Need to check more thoroughly 124x6 with on-board cache disabled.
3D Mark 2000 number goes to ~4000 - give or take a few.

Looking at the numbers posted around - feels like a slow board.
Still, i kind of like it, but that is my only SS7 experience so far.
What do you think of it ?

pshipkov wrote on 2021-10-14, 04:11:

What do you think of it ?

I think you are using VIA mobo. And in this case its worth reading the whole thread. Then you'll find a tweaking solution.

Mmm, i read the thread before posting (otherwise i wouldn't post really).
Tried the applicable suggestions in previous posts.
If you have specific feedback - let me know.

pshipkov wrote on 2021-11-04, 06:07:

Mmm, i read the thread before posting (otherwise i wouldn't post really).
Tried the applicable suggestions in previous posts.
If you have specific feedback - let me know.

Great results pshipkov 😀
Especially your overclocking! Is this with air cooling? Highest I got with air cooling with non freezing ambient is 720MHz and its super unstable!
I have not tried a K6-2+ on my VIA motherboard so maybe it could be that the VIA wants the cache of the K6-3+?
You did use WPCREDIT to tweak? And did you have a look at "twk153b" BIOS setting program?

It has been proven that K6 has poor memory performance on 6X multiplier. It was never optimized 🙁

What cache chip is your board using? Speed in ns and size?

Here is what i got - crisp:

1Mb 4.5ns on-board cache chips. At 133MHz FSB with external cache turned-off board is still flaky.
I have 2 K6 CPUs only. The better one is K6-2+/550ACZ.
It can tick in the 600-700MHz range with default voltage and on air cooling.
Past 700 i put Peltier on top, but the CPU does not need it really. Voltage is 2.1
At that speed the board gets very fussy and is the limiting factor.

This FIC PA-2013 board is ok, but its perf does not wow me. It is cool 1500 3dmark2k points behind what you shown couple of posts above.
Tried the WPCREDIT and twk153b. Squeezed few more quants of perf at the expense of worsened stability.
Tried with external cache on/off. On is better.

Following.

Gonna be playing with my k63+ 550 soon with some agp cards. Maybe a 9800xt

That is a nice board @pshipkov
Sad that it is so slow, I can not remember all the tweaks I did on the VIA.
Cant remember if CTU tweak helped.
How much ram do you have in it? If you go above cacheable range with a VIA the performance goes down a lot.
Did you try a program that can set AGP speed?

@Sphere478, I will be waiting anxiously! Best of luck using ATI cards. If you get them right with that CPU you might beat my score.
What date code is your 550?

Skalabala wrote on 2021-11-05, 06:35:

That is a nice board @pshipkov Sad that it is so slow, I can not remember all the tweaks I did on the VIA. Cant remember if CTU […]
Show full quote

That is a nice board @pshipkov
Sad that it is so slow, I can not remember all the tweaks I did on the VIA.
Cant remember if CTU tweak helped.
How much ram do you have in it? If you go above cacheable range with a VIA the performance goes down a lot.
Did you try a program that can set AGP speed?

@Sphere478, I will be waiting anxiously! Best of luck using ATI cards. If you get them right with that CPU you might beat my score.
What date code is your 550?

Where do I check date code?

Here it is.

download/file.php?id=100174&mode=view

Are you saying I should try a nvidia card instead?

pshipkov wrote on 2021-11-04, 06:07:

Mmm, i read the thread before posting (otherwise i wouldn't post really).
Tried the applicable suggestions in previous posts.
If you have specific feedback - let me know.

I cannot see the spirit of competition here 😀

If you follow the link in my signature, you will probably notice that i don't lack competitive spirit.
Toying with the idea to enter this race here.
😀

An Nvidia card is by far the easiest, especially the how to is documented in this thread.
I was able to run an ATI card faster than Nvidia card. But was never able to do it again to know how I did it.