Date: Sat, 20 May 2000 15:49:43 -0400 From: Coleman Kane <cokane@one.net> To: "Sameer R. Manek" <manek@ecst.csuchico.edu> Cc: "Mike C. Muir" <mmuir@es.co.nz>, Sebastien ROCHE <sr@sxb.bsf.alcatel.fr>, freebsd-stable@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: occasional reboots Message-ID: <20000520154943.A8444@cokane.yi.org> In-Reply-To: <NDBBKDINCKINCMKCHGCIAEEJCMAA.manek@ecst.csuchico.edu>; from manek@ecst.csuchico.edu on Fri, May 19, 2000 at 09:07:30PM -0400 References: <Pine.BSF.4.21.0005191426320.381-100000@haus.lan> <NDBBKDINCKINCMKCHGCIAEEJCMAA.manek@ecst.csuchico.edu>
index | next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail
[-- Attachment #1 --] I think the point is that FreeBSD runs the CPU a lot cooler = not as many unused processor cycles. The last time I overclocked was to send a PMMX-166 to 200. It worked, but now CPU prices are low enough that you will spend the extra money getting really good HS/Fan combos to get it to a certain speed rather than buying a regular fan/hs and getting the fasterchip. Good example: Celeron. The Celeron 366's are within $10 of the 533's now. May as well just get a 533. Sameer R. Manek had the audacity to say: > > -----Original Message----- > > From: owner-freebsd-stable@FreeBSD.ORG > > [mailto:owner-freebsd-stable@FreeBSD.ORG]On Behalf Of Mike C. Muir > > Sebastien ROCHE wrote: > > > > > > I had this kind of problem. > > > The solution was to increase the CAS latency from 2 to 3, and to go back > > > to a not-overclocked cpu. > > > > Strangely, I find FreeBSD to be the most welcoming OS to overclocked > > cpu's.. > > My old celeron 300a which would only go so far as 464mhz in Win NT or 98, > > under FreeBSD 3.2-S, was rock solid at 504mhz. > > Right now i have two ppga 366's at 550, under freebsd they are stable at > > any speed between 550 and 600 (havnt tried any higher) yet Win2k/98 only > > seem to accept 550 without occasional freezes (albiet after a long time) > > Overclocking is entirely a crap shot. You are pushing a system to above what > the vendor rated it for. Maybe it will work, as for you it did. Or maybe > you'll end up with a pile of molten transistors. > > It's not a good way to measure os stability, it is expected that the os will > barf on hardware errors. The question you should be asking is what errors is > win 2k/nt/98 failing on, that fbsd is apparently not noticing, or handling > differently. RAM errors? bus errors? cache errors? video card errors? > > Sameer > > > > To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org > with "unsubscribe freebsd-stable" in the body of the message > -- Coleman Kane President, UC Free O.S. Users Group - http://pohl.ececs.uc.edu [-- Attachment #2 --] -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.0.0 (FreeBSD) Comment: For info see http://www.gnupg.org iD8DBQE5JuxWERViMObJ880RAYtJAJwMslI0V30fS5s+AcA0bImEoV9V2gCfdtRX HA97jpDVIqDEMeiV11JuvaU= =jnMO -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----help
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20000520154943.A8444>