[SLUG] Overclocking under LINUX
Hi all, I wanted to get back into overclocking, but it crashes linux redhat. Is there anyway to hack the kernel so that it thinks it's running on a faster processor? Alternatively there is an Epox motherboard (8K9A+) with locakable PCI slots, that can unlock athlon XP processors without physically cutting and joining bridges, would this scenario then allow Linux to be overclocked (assuming the motherboard has some sort of CPU blocking technology) Regards Mick. -- SLUG - Sydney Linux User's Group - http://slug.org.au/ More Info: http://lists.slug.org.au/listinfo/slug
Re: [SLUG] Overclocking under LINUX
> I wanted to get back into overclocking, but it crashes linux redhat. > > Is there anyway to hack the kernel so that it thinks it's running on a > faster processor? No, the kernel won't care what speed the processor is running at. [ You only need to change kernels if you change architectures or sub-architectures, not MHz. :-) ] > Alternatively there is an Epox motherboard (8K9A+) with locakable PCI > slots, that can unlock athlon XP processors without physically cutting and > joining bridges, would this scenario then allow Linux to be overclocked > (assuming the motherboard has some sort of CPU blocking technology) Not sure, but you're not always going to get a good result when overclocking a box with Linux on it. Linux drives the hardware much harder than Windows usually would, so it's more likely to barf. Maybe it's time to get the best hardware for your most excellent OS. ;-) - Jeff -- "Socks for the foot menu!" - Liam Quin -- SLUG - Sydney Linux User's Group - http://slug.org.au/ More Info: http://lists.slug.org.au/listinfo/slug
Re: [SLUG] Overclocking under LINUX
On Tue, 4 Mar 2003 18:38:25 +1100 Mick Boda <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Hi all, > > I wanted to get back into overclocking, but it crashes linux redhat. Patient: Doctor, doctor, it hurts when I bang my head against the wall. Doctor : Well stop banging your head against the wall and the pain will stop. > Is there anyway to hack the kernel so that it thinks it's running on a faster > processor? What you are seeing has NOTHING to do the what processor speed Linux may or may not think its running. If your machine is stable at the rated clock speed, and crashes when above the rated clock speed then you are running into the limits of what that piece of hardware is capable of. The main thing that happens when you increase the clock speed is that the quality of the digital signals within the components (CPU, bus controllers, PCI bridges, RAM chips etc etc) degrades. Clean transitions between logic 0 and logic 1 (and vice versa) become less clearly defined, the slopes of the transitions increase as a proportion of the clock speed etc. In addition, because heat is generated mostly during the switching transition and the swicthing time per clock cycle has increased, you get increased heating at higher clock rates. In addition, as the termperature goes up, so does the resistance and hence more heating and worse signals. The ONLY way that you MIGHT be able to overclock is if you can find the component which is causing the crashes and cool it down. Cooling will decrase the resistance, decrease the power consumption which and by doing that, help clean up the signals. Erik -- +---+ Erik de Castro Lopo [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Yes it's valid) +---+ Microsoft is finally bringing all of its Windows operating system families under one roof. It will combine all of the features of CE, stability and support of ME and the speed of NT. It will be called Windows CEMENT... -- SLUG - Sydney Linux User's Group - http://slug.org.au/ More Info: http://lists.slug.org.au/listinfo/slug
Re: [SLUG] Overclocking under LINUX
On Tue, 2003-03-04 at 19:13, Jeff Waugh wrote: > Linux drives the hardware much harder than Windows > usually would, so it's more likely to barf. really? howso? I'd guess we'd be getting into pretty hardcore timing issues with memory fetches and dma transfers and stuff, eh. The linux page combining stuff is cool, but I don't really know what's under the hood on windows (I guess no-one really does) so I can't make any informed comparisons. These days I normally use the Windows 2000 installer as a memcheck replacement - much faster. no troll! James. -- SLUG - Sydney Linux User's Group - http://slug.org.au/ More Info: http://lists.slug.org.au/listinfo/slug
