ASUS AI Overclocking, I cant recommend it for a DAW.

WayneSim · Post by **WayneSim** » Fri Nov 14, 2003 7:46 pm

Ok, I been testing my new DAW for around one week (ASUS P4P800 rev 2.0). Asus AI Overclocking IMO is a no go. For those who know nothing and use their PC for internet, gaming and things like that. It would be great!

However something that has buged me is these comments by Andre Dupke in my thread a couple of weeks ago "asus ai overclocking rocks! my p4 2.4 ghz is running @ 3.1 ghz" I hope that's not your DAW. Unless you have checked out what it has done.

I main reason I can't suggest Asus AI overclocking in DAW's is, it dramatically changes the RAM timings. I know it's something obvious to those of you who are into overclocking. But those who are not, you will be none the wiser of what it is actully doing.

My Corsair RAM XMS3200LL is rated at:
2-3-2-6 (LOW Latency)

AI overclocking can make it run at:
2.5-4-4-8 (HIGH Latency)

If you plan on overclocking I suggest you do it manually.

Also something to note is. If I don't manually set the RAM timing in the bios I get default timings of 2.5-3-2-6. When my RAM is rated at 2-3-2-6.

My suggestion to everyone is MANUALLY set your RAM timings. Why would one spend lots of money on GOOD ram, when you use it like cheap stuff!

Post by **garyb** » Fri Nov 14, 2003 8:53 pm

is overclocking nessessary?

Nestor · Post by **Nestor** » Fri Nov 14, 2003 10:12 pm

What do you suggest to do so? How would you proced to overclock manualy and which are the steps to follow?

I think that using the maximum power on your machine is something perfectly justifiable, cos , as you say, you have payed for a good product to take out all its juice! But, at the same time, without doing what overclokers do to their machinese, bringing them to the extreme. I would be happy if I know I'm taking maximum advantage of what I have without getting crazy, that's it.

Post by **garyb** » Sat Nov 15, 2003 3:33 am

On 2003-11-14 22:12, Nestor wrote:
I would be happy if I know I'm taking maximum advantage of what I have without getting crazy, that's it.

i would think that the engineers made that thing to work at the rated speed,reliably.they don't want too many returns.they could run the chips harder(like you do)and get more out,but they'd have an unprofitable amount of failures.fast cars work the same way.although i built the fastest mustang that the streets of fullerton,california ever saw,i think that behavior is silly,too.the speed limit is 65mph and that car was brutal to drive and prone to breakdowns(like a thoroughbred)it's just like any other machine.use it moderately and it will be very reliable.use it hard and it'll break sooner.the current machines are VERY fast.the increase in performance from overclocking is minimal.at one time(with 500mhz cpus)overclocking might have been a MUST for some apps to even run properly.maybe for bleeding edge gaming it still is.but with these audio apps stability is the main thing,2ghz computers are more than powerful enough for most work.i thought my 1.8 was a miracle!currently they're at 3.whatghz?

i'm still not a hater though,have your fun!it just seems unnessessary to me.

Nestor · Post by **Nestor** » Sat Nov 15, 2003 11:46 am

I understand your point Garyb, and in regard to reliability, nothing comes before it...

I too preffer to get a stable system. I have overcloked my from 2.5 to 3.12 and the difference in performance was good for certain applications, but for DAW puposes I have to say, did not.

RAM is something different, cos I don't see RAM as just getting faster, but most of all, getting more capacity for your samples, that's it.

AndreD · Post by **AndreD** » Sun Nov 16, 2003 6:01 am

Our ai overclocked system runs stable for about 5 month now without any crash!
(ai overclocking @ 30%)

overclocking is really useful for daw!
with this 30%, I get up to 50 bands of the neundo Q-filter more!

if you have NO need for more plugs / instuments at the same time, then don´t touch AI overclocking

[ This Message was edited by: Andre Dupke on 2003-11-16 07:11 ]

WayneSim · Post by **WayneSim** » Sun Nov 16, 2003 6:37 am

On 2003-11-16 06:01, Andre Dupke wrote:
Our ai overclocked system runs stable for about 5 month now without any crash!
(ai overclocking @ 30%)

overclocking is relly useful for daw!
with this 30%, I get up to 50 bands more of the neundo Q-filter!

if you have NO need for more plugs / instuments at the same time, then don´t touch AI overclocking

[ This Message was edited by: Andre Dupke on 2003-11-16 06:06 ]

Very interesting. What was your overall lag like? Have you have any sight problems with timing?

Let me say that I'm on both sides when it comes to overclocking. There is a time and place for it. And there is a time and place not for it. There are many factors to consider.

If you are happy with your AI overclock so be it. I just think it would be better if you were to manually set it. IMO I would prefer a 20% overclock with tight RAM timings than a 30% one with slow RAM timings. However that's me, and that depends on the apps i'm running.

Andre, I hope your where not upset for me quoting you. It's just that I didn't what people to assume that AI overclocking is ok for everyone. At 30% overclock what are your RAM timings? What brand and model RAM are you using? What cooling are you using?

Yes, AI overclocking has it's place. However I don't believe that AI overclocking is suited to our needs.

AndreD · Post by **AndreD** » Sun Nov 16, 2003 6:46 am

We are using CM Aero:

<img src="http://www.coolermaster.com/product_com ... 0f7ef4.jpg">

Very silent

, up to 3,6 GHz

<a href="http://www.coolermaster.com/index.php?L ... te">Cooler Master Aero</a>

[ This Message was edited by: Andre Dupke on 2003-11-16 17:44 ]

AndreD · Post by **AndreD** » Sun Nov 16, 2003 7:00 am

@ WayneSim

On 2003-11-16 06:37, WayneSim wrote:
Andre, I hope your where not upset for me quoting you. It's just that I didn't what people to assume that AI overclocking is ok for everyone.

no way

we are here for sharing our experience...

all the best,
andre

[ This Message was edited by: Andre Dupke on 2003-11-16 07:19 ]

Mich · Post by **Mich** » Fri Dec 12, 2003 5:18 pm

Hi all!

I've been using a P4P800 with an overlocked pentium 4 2.4 at 3.14 (30% overlocking) for a while and it is rock, ROCK! stable..

I use not even an xtra heavy cpu fan... only some xtra case fan.. I use Corsair low latency cas-2-2-2 modules with heatspreader. They are ddr 400mhz moduls but overlock easily. My systems runs great even in 12+ hours sessions. I use Pulsar 2 + SRB = 12 dsp's.

My 2 cents,

Adios

AndreD · Post by **AndreD** » Fri Dec 12, 2003 7:32 pm

same here...

2.4 @ 3.1 without crash since 4 month

astroman · Post by **astroman** » Sat Dec 13, 2003 9:04 am

you seem to have some experience with this, so I may ask:
how is it known that the CPU really runs at full speed and doesn't throttle down internally (I've read about something like that as an 'internal safety belt' against overheating).

Have you made some tests of the same system before and after ?

OK, it's just for curiosity as I'd never really overclock anything as my systems have only slow mo fans

cheers, Tom

Neutron · Post by **Neutron** » Sat Dec 13, 2003 9:31 pm

I am also using a p4 2.4c which is running at 3.35. it is using the ASUS p4c800 deluxe.
(manual overclocking) AI overclocking was very useless for me.

i am using the zalman 7000 ALCU cooler with the fan at about 2000 RPM, it is hardly audiable, and my CPU core temperature never rises over 53c

the RAM is only DDR333 so i had to set the devider to 3:2 (asus calls it "266mhz")
the ram is running at 184mhz x2 which is pretty good for mis matched generic PC2700

the memory bandwidth with dual channel is amazing

astroman · Post by **astroman** » Sun Dec 14, 2003 8:02 am

On 2003-12-13 21:31, Neutron wrote:
...and my CPU core temperature never rises over 53c

of course it doesn't. The thing makes 3 million cycles per millisecond, which means that core temperature can rise almost instantaneously.
The display is independant from the 'effective' temperature within the CPU, as the process is totally automated - it's simply too fast to be displayed.
Or did I miss something ?

cheers, Tom