How to overclock the QX9300 processor on the new M17x?

186.24's have been the best for normal usage correct? (no OC) or unstable OC'ing but stock you said you were hitting 16k right?

 

yes stock i'd break 16k consistantly in 3dmark06, and always scored around 10.3k in vantage stock but overclocking is unstable with these, also mandrake reports his crysis fps went way down with these, but mine actually went up a tiny bit, gta4 went down a bit though but not much

 

so as of right now, becuase I will do overclocking for bench, what is the best driver?

 

as far as i'm aware unless mandrake has found another, dox's 182.46 is the best performance wise when overclocking that works with the M17x, you also have to disable hybrid sli and integrated gpu to get these to work

Edit: I've heard that the 185.20 drivers are the king for vantage but we haven't been able to get them to work correctly as it distorts the screen

 

Damn, Dell needs to get on top of this... it's quite funny that they release a product in which they don't even have correctly working drives for

 

Dells beta driver 186.12 works fine just no oc capability, same with 186.24. all normal functions work fine in both drivers including hybrid sli, it is the overclocking that gets unstable but for normal usage those drivers are good enough.

Even with the unstable oc of the 186.24 i still was able to get my scores about a 100 or so points from my bests with the dox 182.46

 

Are you able to run stable with milder OC's ? or are you just eeking out single hot benchmarks? Have you monitored any GPU/CPU temps during the runs? Just curious as to how well its handling all the heat...

 

Well i don't plan to use gpu overclocking for normal usage as the 2 280's can handle anything out there right now at stock settings, even crysis @ 1900x1200 very high settings (95% of the game), so my overclocking is for single hot runs, The max i've ever seen my gpu's at was 91C but that was during the OCCT Stress test, normal gaming never saw it above 83c and now that i use a cryo cooler i never see it above 70c.

 

How did you get the M17X to take the 186.24 drivers?, I keep getting:

"The Nvidia Setup progarm could not locate any drivers that are compatable with your current hardware, Setupill now exit".

Thanks

 

if you downloaded it from laptopvideo2go there should be a .zip file in the extraction folder, extract all the infs into the driver folder and run it again. If you got it straight from xfastest like i did it works right out of the gate, laptopvideo2go likes to zip the infs up for somereason with that driver.

 

Thanks..I will try again with the xfastest.

The Dox file on laptoptogo was an .exe

 

yes the file is an exe and so is the xfastest, but the exe will extract to a directory and in that directory will be a .zip file which with the latopvideo2go you will need to extract the zip file also.

 

Well I got the new driver in..Thanks. it will boot now with an FSB 1290 (3.06),
Let me see how stable it is.

 

funny never thought a video driver would affect cpu oc, mine will boot all the way up to 1333 fsb which is around 3.3 with default multiplier but it does eventually BSOD on me. My limit now is the stock voltage just isn't enough to get past 3.06 and be stable.

 

funny and tragic. i thought ppl were referring to OCing the GPU being an issue with those drivers. my CPU is still running @ 2.93 GHz with 11x mult and default fsb.

@cdcool: any issues with the new drivers and OCing the CPU?

 

Got it up to 2.97 stable (still crashes at 3.06) with the new video driver Maybe it does make a difference.

 

Computers are strange..you never know.

 

I think all drivers be it audio, video or others can effect overclocking.

 

Push your FSB up to 1080 with 11x mult and let me know if you are stable at 2.70, use CPU-Z to check it.

 

cant get my qx9300 past 2.97, i believe it is a bios issue.

 

2.93-2.97 seems the norm . Not sure if they will ever add voltage adjustment but they could possibly give more voltage to Quads down the road , not holding my breath though .

 

With multipliers or FSB overclocking? Owners seem to get higher clocks by just pumping FSB and leaving multi stock.

 

FSB at 1180 and 11x mult is 3.24 GHz. i'm not stable even at 3.02. but i'm willing to try stock mult and higher FSBs to see if the gaming performance is better, i really don't care how benchmark tools asses the difference.

did u mean stock multiplier (9x) and FSB at 1180 = 2.65 GHz?

 

Not surprising. That's the same speed I got with my P8700. The fact that it's an unlocked proc doesn't seem to make a difference with the M17x. Same thing goes for the x9100 vs T9900.

 

the video driver will not hinder your overclocking abilities. and the bios overclock proves this because it's locked it.


when you overclock in the bios and it's stable (voltages is good, the chipset can handle the fsb pumping, the cpu is good(not a defective one)) no matter what you do in your OS. it will not freeze and/or lock up and/or BSOD. THIS IS ONE REASON WHY THE WHITEBOOK WAS SO POPULAR.


FSB overclocking would be more unstable then using the mulitper on the chip.(extreme chips. that's why it's so much more expensive.) Raising the FSB will also raise everything else in your system.(this may include the bandwidth of the NB, the ram(posible) the gpu's and alot more) this is WILL get better results in benchmarks because everything else is raising up.

then why we just don't do this then?
becuase it raises everything else. this can hinder your overclock on your cpu. the gpu can render unstable(not likley) the ram can only be pumped so much(that's why 1333 is better then 1066. someone can try this if they have both 1066 and 1333 on an extreme chip. my theory is you can pump the cpu less with a fsb then the multiplier). also the chipset can only go so much so even if the cpu can hit 10ghz, the chip may only be able to limit it to 5ghz.
EX:
100mhz*4x= 400. fsb (overclocking you would use the clockspeed before it is muiltplied so raise the 100)
101*4x= 404mhz(raise it some more)
150*4x= 600mhz(soo how it raises the clock speed but it raises everything else.)

also a big con is the heat that it draws raising everything else up.

the pros about this is you can receive higher benchmarks but it will limit your gpu overclock etc.

mulitplier overclocking only uses the cpu. it raises the second number on the cpu. this can push the cpu higher because it takes out everything else out of the equation. the chipset (the main victim) also doesn't really matter to this. you can hit unpresidented numbers THAT'S WHY EXTREME CHIPS ARE SO MUCH. i will explain what i mean later.

later LOL.
100mhz*4x= 400 mhz(now raise the second number the multiplier)
100mhz*4.5x = 450mhz(see how easy it increases know pump it some more)
100mhz*5x= 500mhz(the multiplier increases by.5 saving you a whole lot of time. instead of one number at a time. that's why i skipped above because it would of taking for ever. lets see what happens with more mulitpier overclocking
100mhz*6= 600mhz(woah easiier then the fsb right??????)
also it only raises the cpu so it will only make the cpu hotter (maybe the NB) but other conponents will stay cool..
OF COUSRE THE VOLTAGED IS A BIG PART OF THIS
now don't you want the best of both worlds. then do it.

as i said the the pro. the X first.(getting lazy. lol) and see how far you get.(getting really lazy so i'm going to speed it up and lets say the max you can get is 600mhz total. using the fsb and the mulitplier)
100mhz*4x = 400(raise the x)
100mhz*5x = 550(now raise the fsb)
120mhz*5x = 600. (now you have the cpu maxed out with some of your other components raised.)


now what's really suppose to happen is the fsb is suppose to find the exact number of your cpu/mobo/chipset/ram limits. if the max cpu is 610mhz then you won't get that with the mulitplies alone. so
100mhz*6x = 600
100mhz*6.5x = 650= bsod(see now lets add the fsb into it.)
101mhz*6x =606(almost at 610 raise it one more)
102mhz*6x = 612=(maybe bsod i'm not sure that's where prime and other test comes to play.)


now that was alittle bad as i didn't raise the fsb much because i was using low numbers for easy math, etc. now lets say you want to use the X but also want the fsb to "strengthen" other components and you already know that 610mhz is your limit.
150mhz*5x = 600 but you don't want the fsb that high(reason is i'm using a low number. you numbers should be really much much higher)
140mhz*5.5x = 770 mhz= to high
120mhz*5.5x = 660mhz
110mhz*5.5x = 605(almost there)
111mhz*5.5x =610.5(yes yes yes yes)


that's for max performance.

for me i would do
101mhz*6x= 606
102mhz*6x= 612
so i can pump the gpu more and still have alittle fsb in it. (in benchmarks everything matters )

HOPEFULLY THIS LITTLE GUIDE WILL HELP EVERYONE.
*try to pump the fsb only and see how far you get with your gpu. i may be wrong on that.

 

WOW
how long did you type that
will have to read it sometime in the future
im tired now

 

Your theory is right in system's that don't have ram divisors, pci-e lock, etc (not really the case here but u r 1/2 right).

And in real life higher FSB don't give u any performance increase, i can show some comparisons if you want

PS: i really don't understood your math as stock FSB in mobile processors is 266

 

Yeah, usually memory intensive applications would benefit from FSB pumping, but overall, there isn't much of an increase in performance over multiplier OCing to warrant it better. But the main benefit of FSB overclocking is that you don't need to buy an extreme processor to do it.

 

seconded...

 

this is true. you don't need to spend xxxx.xx amount of money for an extreme cpu and still overclock by using the fsb.


and i used the 100*4x as an example for easily math. you want to use a real life situation as in
266*9.5??????

 

if i could i would rep u

 

Sorry I meant FSB at 1080 and 11x should give you 2.97

 

Yeah i love crazy maths like

x = (38*7) * 4
y = (4/5) * x
z = x / 4 * (0.95*10)

Proc: Z | FSB: X | RAM: Y

Perfect.

 

If you're trying to educate you need to say where the numbers are coming from.

 

honestly i understand the whole idea, but putting it into play ....so i am just gonna ask for help when i get mine to actually see how far i can get this thing

There are always people smarter then you and i embrace that

 

I'm new to this...I have an M17x with QX9300,256SSD,8GB@1333,1x260M,1200p

I cannot pull a 3dmark06 score over 11400 at stock...if anyone can help me try to find out what is wrong...and I was told I am suppose to get atleast 13500

 

only one card is working. try a different driver.

 

^^^if this reply was for me..I only have one video card...can u please explain

 

if you only have one card than 11400 sounds about right, i have practically the same specs as you but have 2x 280's in sli and only pulled 13500 at stock on 06, oc'd though hit 16690 (record for the m17x so far)

 

Whew!!!I thought i screwed things up when I oc'ed it only using the multipliers

 

how to overclock the gpus? i get 15080 on benchmark 06 with overclocked cpu only and stock gpu drivers.

 

Nvidia System Tools to OC the GPU. With CPU OC'ing and no GPU OC'ing I get 16.1K.

 

its known that benchmark 06 is cpu based. if you reached 3.5 ghz with the x9100 then this is normal.

 

I understand, I was just making a statement. As far as I know no one else at least at NBR has an M17x with a x9100 so all I have is the qx9300 to compare it to.

 

i see . nice selection then.

 

i also think its good to say the settings we tried with the benchmark 06 . it has one hundrend settings inside. i selected 1920x1200 and force precision. no antialiasing. all the other settings to default

 

1920x1200? Not the default of 1280x1024?

 

no not the default. 1920x1200 as i said. i wanted to see the results with full hd

 

Out of curiosity run it at the default settings and see what you get.

 

ok i will do that later. now i formatted my m17x again because i used the Kcissem overclock setting for the gpus and the m17x was stucking when entered the windows. even when i got it back it didnt stop this. the alienware sense was loading the camera for ages too. dont know why but i couldnt even enter system restore through safe mode.