I have a AMD Athlon X2 6400+ BE thats stock 3.2ghz

first off, i cant go higher than 3.6ghz( 225 bus freq. x16 multi)
second i tried increasing the volts, but the cpu only uses 1.428 volts, i tried to go to 1.45 but it wont take it but it will still run. anyone know why.

x16 is the stock multiplier, yah? Try lowering it and then upping the FSB. And aren't the BE's supposed to have upwards-unlocked multipliers?

I'm suprised you got it to go that fast. K8 based chips were pretty much pushing their limit around 3.2GHz anyway. The reason is likely AMD manufacturing process.

no it seems like my max FSB is 225 but i heard ppl have gotten these things to 4.2ghz

Well have you tried changing the multi at all?

there have been people that have gotten core 2 quads to 6GHz with liquid nitrogen cooling too but that doesn't mean that the majority of the chips are capible of getting anywhere near that exotic cooling or not. There will always be anomalies, but for the most part K8 runs out of gas around 3ish GHz.

I'm surprised you got it that high even. they usually average around 3.2...

Yeah I wasn't aware that the new Althon X2 BE's could hit that high of a clockspeed without crazy cooling.

my heatsink rocks thats why i run 35c idle 41c running crysis

strange CPU ID says my freq is at 219 right now which is wat i want it at, but my motherboard monitor says its at 700 with a X5 multi???

Trust what is says in your BIOS. the latest version of CPU-Z should also give you a proper reading.

To be honest, expecting more than 3.6 with that CPU is dreaming. Just like the others, you must have one hell of a CPU to even get to 3.6 on air cooling.

If you want to see if your HTT limited, drop the CPU multi and try push the HTT frequency. Even nForce4 based boards were able to get over 300Mhz

BTW what heatsink are you using?

ZALMAN CNPS 9700 NT 110mm 2 Ball Ultra Quiet CPU Cooler
i tried droping the HT it lets my fsb go up, i got to 3.8 but is to unstable to hold so i had to drop iot down to 3.52

im gonna get a new processor soon anyways, gonna sell this to my freind and get either this one: Intel Core 2 Quad Q6700 Processor HH80562PH0678MK - 2.66GHz, 8MB Cache, 1066MHz FSB, Kentsfield, Quad-Core, OEM, Socket 775, Processor

or this one: Intel Core 2 Quad Q9300 Processor BX80580Q9300 - 2.50GHz, 6MB Cache, 1333MHz FSB, Yorkfield, Quad Core, Retail, Socket 775, Processor with Fan

or: Intel Core 2 Duo E8400 Processor BX80570E8400 - 3.0GHz, 6MB Cache, 1333MHz FSB, Wolfdale, Dual-Core, Retail, Socket 775, Processor with Fan

then again AMD is coming out with thier new 6 core and 12 core shangai's this fall

Get 8400. Don't expect miracles from X2 6400+.

my non OC 6400+ lost to my friends 8400 by 1 fps on 3dmark and he was oc at 3.3 stock for him is 3.0

Doesn't make any sense, try a different benchmark like PC Mark, Sis Sandra (Arithmetic/Multimedia) or Science Mark.

Clock-to-clock, Core 2 Duo (newer ones especially) are approximately 40% faster than AMD (Athlon X2 Socket 939/AM2) Processors.

Supreet Virdi said:
Paul, Supreet is right. If Supreet says Intel's chips are faster then you know Intel's chips are faster. You probably don't know Paul, but Supreet is the most loyal AMD supporter around here

Adam Kolak said:

well, except for SuperXP but I haven't seen him on in a long time.

Hi again PCGEEK ..lol

That X2 Vs the Core 2......what about other hardware? Were they running the same video card? Memory?

If you wanna bench a CPU, don't bench it with 3D Mark.