From owner-freebsd-multimedia Thu Sep 16 18: 0: 9 1999 Delivered-To: freebsd-multimedia@freebsd.org Received: from pluto.ipass.net (pluto.ipass.net [198.79.53.5]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id ED38E157CE for ; Thu, 16 Sep 1999 18:00:05 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from rhh@ipass.net) Received: from stealth.ipass.net. (ppp-1-27.dialup.rdu.ipass.net [209.170.132.27]) by pluto.ipass.net (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id UAA11302 for ; Thu, 16 Sep 1999 20:59:52 -0400 (EDT) Received: (from rhh@localhost) by stealth.ipass.net. (8.9.3/8.8.8) id VAA10891 for multimedia@freebsd.org; Thu, 16 Sep 1999 21:00:53 -0400 (EDT) (envelope-from rhh) Date: Thu, 16 Sep 1999 21:00:53 -0400 From: Randall Hopper To: multimedia@freebsd.org Subject: Is video overclocking risky? Message-ID: <19990916210053.A10590@ipass.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Mailer: Mutt 0.95.1i Sender: owner-freebsd-multimedia@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.org I have a new Matrox G200 PCI I picked up, and I notice I pick up about a 10% XStone increase by using "overclock_mem" in XFree86 3.9.16. So in practice, is this risky? Or do you just risk video corruption? From what little I know, I think this means it clocks the RAMDAC faster, so it (along with the memory) is being pushed. At high resolutions and refresh rates when the RAMDAC is already up toward the high end of its limits, I think this means it'll be running closer to or past the spec freq limit (maybe pulling more current than it was designed to). Is this right in practice? Randall To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-multimedia" in the body of the message