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>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
--YZ5djTAD1cGYuMQK Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable I think the point is that FreeBSD runs the CPU a lot cooler =3D 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 mon= ey 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 b= ack > > > 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 9= 8, > > 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) >=20 > Overclocking is entirely a crap shot. You are pushing a system to above w= hat > 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. >=20 > It's not a good way to measure os stability, it is expected that the os w= ill > 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? >=20 > Sameer >=20 >=20 >=20 > To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org > with "unsubscribe freebsd-stable" in the body of the message >=20 --=20 Coleman Kane President,=20 UC Free O.S. Users Group - http://pohl.ececs.uc.edu --YZ5djTAD1cGYuMQK Content-Type: application/pgp-signature -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.0.0 (FreeBSD) Comment: For info see http://www.gnupg.org iD8DBQE5JuxWERViMObJ880RAYtJAJwMslI0V30fS5s+AcA0bImEoV9V2gCfdtRX HA97jpDVIqDEMeiV11JuvaU= =jnMO -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --YZ5djTAD1cGYuMQK-- 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?20000520154943.A8444>