Date: Fri, 19 May 2000 18:04:44 -0700 From: "Sameer R. Manek" <manek@ecst.csuchico.edu> To: "Mike C. Muir" <mmuir@es.co.nz>, "Sebastien ROCHE" <sr@sxb.bsf.alcatel.fr> Cc: <freebsd-stable@FreeBSD.ORG> Subject: RE: occasional reboots Message-ID: <NDBBKDINCKINCMKCHGCIAEEJCMAA.manek@ecst.csuchico.edu> In-Reply-To: <Pine.BSF.4.21.0005191426320.381-100000@haus.lan>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
> -----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
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?NDBBKDINCKINCMKCHGCIAEEJCMAA.manek>