T3000 overclocking

[Bacterius]

Hello,
I'm trying to overclock my CPU which is an Intel Celeron T3000 @ 1.8GHz (dual core). Multiplier is 9, FSB 800MHz, bus speed 200MHz.

Mainboard model is 0G848F, but here's the problem, SetFSB does not recognize this motherboard and so I can not overclock the processor since I don't know the clock generator. I looked online but found no relevant websites on this particular cpu & motherboard model. Here is a CPU-Z screenshot - there is a field just right to the motherboard model which I know shouldn't be empty... but it is :

Does anyone by any chance ever had to work with this model and knows the correct clockgen for this one ? Also, is it actually safe to "get" the fsb information using any clock generator to check whether it's the correct one or not (without setting anything) ? I would say yes but not sure. Also - last question - since this is a software OC I know it doesn't persist over a reboot, but if the computer somehow freezes while overclocking, does it actually get damaged (provided I instantly power it off), or not ? If not then software OC would be a great way to test the limits of the cpu before putting in the results into the BIOS.

Thanks for your help.

 

[Mashed1316]

Hello there.

I'm sorry to be the one who's bringing the bad news, but i don't think it's good to overclock that processor i mean, it's on a laptop, usually laptop processors runs a little bit hot, and overclocking could damage it if you don't have the right cooling solution.

Here are the specs for the T3000:

Intel® Celeron® Processor T3000 (1M Cache, 1.80 GHz, 800 MHz FSB)with SPEC Code(s)SLGMY

Its FSB is 800MHz.

Let me ask you, why do you want the overclock? the processor itself can't handle too much apps/programs running? do you feel your system slow? something? :huh:

 

[Bacterius]

Let me ask you, why do you want the overclock? the processor itself can't handle too much apps/programs running? do you feel your system slow? something?

I feel like I'm not getting the most out of my hardware. I mean without any additional cooling my CPU idles at 40°C and doesn't exceed 60°C on full load (Prime95 overnight using Coretemp to check min/max), which is pretty cool for a laptop CPU. So I thought I might just overclock it a bit to get a little more power out of the laptop without overheating it (processing power would be useful as I'm doing heavy number crunching on my laptop, and every bit helps)

And anyway I'm going to get a better, faster laptop in a few weeks so I thought the hell with it and get some overclocking experience on laptops. The one I have currently didn't cost that much anyway, got it for $400 on e-bay.

 

[Mashed1316]

Well, there's another catch, the most reliable overclock comes from the BIOS, notebook's BIOS are not too extended.. you could overclock your processor with software.

But i know nothing about overclocking software hehe

 

[Bacterius]

Yeah a simple BIOS overclock is not going to work here, all dell laptops have that funky bios with an actual mouse cursor ... and no options at all except choosing function keys and speedstep enabling/disabling.

That's why I was thinking about software overclocking first before messing with the BIOS, to see if the laptop was actually capable.

 

[Lordbob75]

1. Dont Overclock laptops
2. You can't, its OEM.

~Lordbob

 

[Bacterius]

2. You can't, its OEM.

Okay oh well too bad.

1. Dont Overclock laptops

Stop repeating the same thing over and over like it's a damn meme, why should a laptop (an overclockable one, that is) be any different than a desktop, provided an appropriate cooling solution it is totally worth it. Oh yeah, sure, it's a bit harder, components may overheat if you're not careful, lower error margin blah blah ... but hey, it's the same thing with a desktop. Sigh.

 

[Lordbob75]

Stop repeating the same thing over and over like it's a damn meme, why should a laptop (an overclockable one, that is) be any different than a desktop, provided an appropriate cooling solution it is totally worth it. Oh yeah, sure, it's a bit harder, components may overheat if you're not careful, lower error margin blah blah ... but hey, it's the same thing with a desktop. Sigh.

Because it isnt the same at ALL. You want reasons?

1. Laptops already have poor cooling.
2. Laptops are meant to use LESS power, so overclocking means less battery life.
3. Laptops already have a shorter life than desktops, overclocking doesn't help
4. Laptop hardware is not powerful enough to make overclocking actually worth it.

That reason enough?

~Lordbob

 

[Bacterius]

1. Laptops already have poor cooling.
2. Laptops are meant to use LESS power, so overclocking means less battery life.
3. Laptops already have a shorter life than desktops, overclocking doesn't help
4. Laptop hardware is not powerful enough to make overclocking actually worth it.

1. I agree on this one
2. Uh, ever heard of a desktop replacement ? Laptops *can* be used to use less power but sometimes they are just meant as desktops that can be easily moved. Example : someone with divorced parents would be hard-pressed getting a desktop when he wants to game or whatever.
3. ? Overclocking doesn't help desktops either, no point here
4. Are you kidding me ? That was true a few years ago when laptops were meant for browsing in the airport lounge and nothing else. Check out a modern laptop one of those days, you'll be amazed how much power you can cram in one. More costly hardware ? Yes. Less powerful hardware ? No way, it may be a little bit less powerful than a desktop, but vastly inferior ? No way. These are netbooks you're talking about.

So you made one point which I agree on but which can be defeated using an appropriate cooling system - of course one isn't going to watercool his laptop, but FWIW a good air cooling system works wonders when it's properly set up. All three other points were misconceptions of the past era.

And FYI I was not trying to overclock my laptop to some ridiculously high clock rate, I just wanted to see if I could increase the CPU's frequency a little bit since CPU temperature is already pretty low. 200MHz do help. Maybe not with what you are doing on your computer, but for what I'm doing it does. You told me it was OEM and that overclocking was impossible - fair enough, thank you for your reply, now I know it is pointless trying. But then you told me "don't overclock laptops" like it was some kind of criminal activity. I disagree. And I will defend it until someone proves me wrong with real points, not just generic statements such as "laptops are not meant to be powerful" or "heat damages laptop components".

 

[Lordbob75]

Very well, I will get VERY specific for you.

Those are not misconceptions of a past era, they are downsides of how laptops are designed and the physical limitations of the chips.

When you overclock, you are running your hardware past the rated speed. This requires more power (which generates more heat), and can create instability in the chip and system.
Laptops are designed (yes, ALL of the components) to use less power than their desktop counterparts. This means that they require less voltage. When you overclock, 2 things happen. You have to put MORE voltage into the chip (yes, going up only 200MHz can require almost .5 more volts). Because not all chips can run at a higher speed (even if you pump more volts in), this can either just generate heat, break your system, or destroy your hardware (yes, that has happened).
Now, yes this is exactly the same as desktops. The difference is that laptop CPUs are NOT desktop CPUs, and tend to have a MUCH tighter speed ratio. This means that even if you can OC it, it wont go much without a lot of voltage, if any.
This leads into the point of laptop hardware not being powerful enough to be worth it. If you can OC a dual core CPU from 2.5Ghz to 2.7Ghz, congrats. You won't (likely) notice a speed difference, and it would be much more likely to be unstable and crash (or melt). I absolutely did not say they did not have powerful components (they do).
As to overclocking desktops: I am running an i5 at 4.5Ghz with no noticable rise in temperatures. For everyday use, there is not a huge speed advantage. For benchmarking or heavy CPU programs, it DOES.

So no, those 3 arguments were NOT misconceptions from a past era, but realistic limitations of todays hardware.

As to your last point, I understand, but you just won't notice 200Mhz. Even if you really wanted to, the risks and negatives outweigh the advantages (which are negligible).

For the record, I OWN a desktop replacement laptop, and its great. I would NEVER OC it (thats what the desktop is for anyways), and its for the reasons I listed.

I hope that explanation makes a little more sense. I wasn't trying to argue with you about it or make it sound like a criminal thing to do, just trying to make sure you don't burn out your system. Yes, people have had laptops catch on fire... :shock:

~Lordbob

 

[Bacterius]

Thanks for being more specific, it is clearer now
Didn't mean to be rude by the way, I just don't tend to accept things without detailed proof of it.

Thanks again for your reply.

 

[Lordbob75]

Thanks for being more specific, it is clearer now
Didn't mean to be rude by the way, I just don't tend to accept things without detailed proof of it.

Thanks again for your reply.

I totally understand that, no worries (I am that way myself).

Glad it was clearer that time.

~Lordbob

 

[sygnus21]

Thanks for being more specific, it is clearer now
Didn't mean to be rude by the way, I just don't tend to accept things without detailed proof of it.

Thanks again for your reply.

Well you can always try it anyway - just to see if it can be done! However you run the risk of damaging the machine as Lordbob explained.

Though I don't currently own a laptop, I am an overclocker and Lordbob has made some very vaild points. +1 to Lordbob

Good luck in whatever direction you go.

Peace

 

[pantsaregood]

If you have to boost your vcore by 0.5v to boost your clock speed by 200MHz, you're doing it wrong.

 

[Lordbob75]

If you have to boost your vcore by 0.5v to boost your clock speed by 200MHz, you're doing it wrong.

Or the chip just isn't overclockable.

~Lordbob

 

[pantsaregood]

If you can't get a 200 MHz overclock out of a 0.5v increase on a modern CPU, then there's no way the CPU is going to run stable at stock. 0.5v would be close to a 50% increase in voltage to most CPUs now.

 

[setan berdasi]

why you don't undervolt it??
longer battery life, low temperature