Tom's Guide | Tom's Hardware | Tom's Games
 |
 |
 |
I am not sure what the term "overclocking" means, but I think it has something to do with making your PC go faster. I have a Dell Optiplex Gs, The Service Tag number is 9KXYZ. Is there a way I can get more out of that old Pentium MMX 200mhz processor like making it go up to 233mhz?
Thank-You
As far as I know, it is not possible to overclock a Dell, but you should be able to modify the multiplier in order to upgrade the cpu. You would probably have to modify the jumpers on the motherboard, you should be able to find this information on the inside of the case, if the Optiplex GX's are anything to go by. You could set the system to run a 3.5x multiplier with a 66MHz FSB. That will give you 233MHz, as to whether or not you will notice a difference, thats another story all together.
0 
Jesse,
You have about 5 posts on this same machine. Did you read any of the responses? Did you read the documents I provided links to? Stuart, jam and Adam have all given good advice but you're gonna have to do some of this yourself. We just don't have the machine in front of us.
0
1. http://computing.net/hardware/wwwboard/forum/17949.html
2. http://computing.net/hardware/wwwboard/forum/17951.html
3. http://computing.net/hardware/wwwboard/forum/18046.html
Thought another was on the win98 forum but I'm either mistaken or couldn't find it.
0
Jesse, after reading all the other posts, there is more than enough information to, in my opinion, answer your question, or at least get you started. Skip was kind enough to discover that your board has a thoeretical limit of 200MHz, then jam came along and kindly pointed out a possible work around for the 200MHz limit. I don't mean to be insulting, but obviously you don't have the level of computer literacy required to do something like this.
0
I am sorry, but I looked at my mother board many times, and the instruction manual from 1997 and the only jumpers that I see on the mother board are just to make it support different CPU's like what SkipCox showed me on that dell website. I do not think that I do not have enough experience, I personaly think now, not before that you cannot Overclock a Dell. I was looking at my old 486 and I saw those jumpers that you were talking about on the Motherboard, but no offense to people who like old computers, or collect them but a 486 is pretty much useless to me now, but thank-you for all the help you have given me, and yes I do read your responses and most of the time my question is answered so there is no point for me to reply.
Thank-You
0
Yes...look at those jumpers...what do you see? 100, 133, 166, 200? Hmmm...let's see if we can figure this out. The mobo appears to operate with a 66mhz bus only, so these jumpers must be for the multipliers...make sense? 100 would be 1.5x, 133 would be 2x, 166 would be 2.5x, & 200 would be 3x. So if this theory is correct, if you set the jumper to 100, it should run your 200 as a 233. Try it, you have nothing to lose. And take that extra 32 mb of RAM out & run with only 64mb...I guarantee it will run much better! Post back with your results....
0
Thank-You very much Jam I actually understand what you are talking about and it did work! Now I only have a very big heatsink on that old Pentium 200, show I get a fan for it with a heat sink to keep it cool?
Thank-You
0
One more question I thought of, when it says that I have a 233mhz processor when I over clock, do I really have a 233mhz processor or is it just tricking it to think it has 233mhz, although it really has 200?
Thank-You
0
It gets that information from the clock generator, so you you have a pentium class processor running at 233MHz. You can download a program called Sandra, by SiSoft:
http://www.sisoftware.co.uk/
Install that and run the CPU benchmark with the system running at both 200 and 233.
OT, but I remember a time when the Pentium 200 was the fastest desktop availiable, everybody said, damn they can't get much faster than this, 7 years on and we are pushing towards 4GHz, makes me wonder if its even worth trying to keep up anymore, I am too scared to calculate how much I have spent on computers over the years, from the $100's that I spent on my C64 to the $1000's that I spent on my A2000HD (which is still going strong, btw), when will it all end? Oh well, theres no real point to this, just thought I would have a rant. If you have made it this far, thanks for reading.
0
FINALLY!! LOL! Congratulations!
If your heatsink doesn't have a fan mounted on it, yes, you should install one...
0
Actually yes I did, it has four slots for RAM and it has to 32's in there right now. I wonder if four sixteens would be faster?
0
2 x 32 or 4 x 16 shouldn't make any difference unless the 16's are better RAM. There were a few different types of SIMM RAM...FPM (fast page memory) or EDO (Extended Data Output) being two that I can think of offhand. EDO was the fastest.
Have you tried running any tests with 64mb & then again with 96mb to see if there's any difference? Theoretically, the 64mb should be faster because it stays within the cacheable limit of the chipset.
0
Its seems that the computer runs at the same speed with both 64 and 96, even using that software. The Dell website said for this model of computer that this computer can take up to 4x 32 Simm Ram which is 128 megs of RAM, could that mean that the cach limit could be 128? Or is that just something that they put on there to make you think that more Ram will increase the performance? How could I get the cach limit of this computer?
Thank-You
0
Identify the mobo chipset.
For example, the Intel 440TX chip is about the most notorious for only caching 64Mb of memory. The user has to decide if he wants the additional memory or the speed.
Belarc Advisor, SiSoft Sandra, Aida32 are some of the free downloads that will id your mobo chipset. A google search will then turn up lots of info on it.
Glad to see the multi trick worked on this motherboard.
Skip
0
Your cache limit is definitely 64mb...all the old Intel socket 7 chipsets had a cache limit of 64mb, except the 430HX...that one would cache 512mb but there had to be a special tag ram installed on the mobo to get it to work...if the tag ram isn't installed, it only caches 64 like the others....
You're right about the 128mb...that's just something the board manufacturers did...they didn't tell ya that exceeding the cache limit generally does no harm than good....
0
Here's good info on the 430FX chipset:
http://support.intel.com/support/chipsets/430FX/
And the first paragraph here confirms jam's statement in response 19/20.
http://www.pcguide.com/ref/mbsys/cache/char_Cacheability.htm
0
If you want it to go even faster, you could always by a second hand motherboard that can handle a bigger processer, and then by a processer that is faster than your pentium 1 that can go in your new motherboard.
That probly sounds a dumb idear, but It makes your computer well faster than overclocking. you also have a danger of killing your cpu or motherboard. :)
Thats what I done when I had my K6 166mhz
Hope this helps
0
The K6/166 was junk anyway...another of the performace rated CPUs...I think it clocked at 133 if I'm not mistaken. I still have one or 2 of em & I can't even give em away...lol...they're as bad as the old Cyrix CPUs (yep, got some of them too).
0
guys, this seemed like a great idea for me to try as well. Unfortunately, when I did it jumpered at 100MHz, a P166MMX was reported in bios. It was previously reported as a 200mmx with the jumper at 200, so either the jumper switch at 100 is really, perhaps 2X50 and the processor is forcing at least 2.5x66, or maybe the processor in there really is not a 233mmx as I thought I'd installed, and possibly it is one of the "locked" 200mmx chips which won't allow overclocking. I benchmarked it with Sisoft Sandra and it showed a performance slightly poorer than their reference 166mmx, and way below their reference 200mmx, so I do believe the bios info is correct. I'll try a benchmark at the original setting, and check the processor while I'm in there to verify that it's a 233mmx, but has anyone got any other ideas?
Thanks!
0
Wow, a couple of surprises.
This motherboard was socket 5, and I've got a 200MMX working in there now. I tried it at the 90MHz setting as well. At that setting the bios reported a 150MHz processor. I think the processor is locked at 3.0x, and at the 90mhz setting it was 3x50, and at the 100mhz setting it was 3x55. Now it's set once again at 200, and bios reports 200, and sisoft sandra benchmarks the processor between their reference 166mmx and 233mmx results, so I imagine that unless I start trying with a non-locked 200mmx (rare) or a 233mmx, that'll be as far as this one goes. If I can find another 233mmx around here, I'll certainly try it in order to hopefully provide another success story of this 233mhz performance from a dell only supported to 200mhz.
0  |
 |
 |
This post is quite old and has been locked from receiving new replies. Please create a new posting instead.
| Ads by Google |
