Acer TimelineX 3820TG Owners Lounge. Info, benchmarks, tweaks, mods and upgrades

[Wiezok]

I expect you 3820TG owners to get much better

This is with 4820TG i5-450m version..

[lee_what2004]

Wiezok, with what resolution?

[Wiezok]

Wiezok, with what resolution?

default, that is I didn't change anything in any settings except oc'd the gpu

[Bronsky]

'Bout time somebody broke 10k. I knew it could be done. Congratulations! No oC on the CPU? Nice to hear. I'll have to start running 3DMark to see what I can do.

Bronsky

[PlatinuM195]

My 3820TG's arrived only 2.5 days from the time I ordered it.

[Hendrickson]

Congrats PlatinuM195. Nice to see another Kiwi on the forum and a 3820TG owner. Doubt there will be many in NZ.

[zeem]

what game fps increases are you getting, hendrickson with your OC'ed lappy?

[Hendrickson]

I expect you 3820TG owners to get much better

This is with 4820TG i5-450m version..

Nice what GPU clocks are those? Its strange there are such differences, when the hardware is basically the same?

My best so far:



Doesn't seem to turbo much, but sits with both cores over 3Ghz

CPU-Z Validator 3.1

what game fps increases are you getting, hendrickson with your OC'ed lappy?

Haven't really looked to hard but I would say 5-6 fps less in BFBC2 (Need to confirm via fraps) I need to do more testing to see that 166.7 Mhz is stable after a few hours of gaming.
Why would this be? Is strange 2.6Ghz to 3.2Ghz and its slower??!? This just seems to be in BFBBC2 so far.

Losing FPS would seem my CPU isn't stable. But it did handle over an hour of prime95 stress testing with no errors. Odd... I will try lowering the FSB I guess.

[liath]

Damn, It seems I cant change language on my new install;<.

[min2209]

Nice what GPU clocks are those? Its strange there are such differences, when the hardware is basically the same?

My best so far:



Doesn't seem to turbo much, but sits with both cores over 3Ghz

CPU-Z Validator 3.1




Haven't really looked to hard but I would say 5-6 fps less in BFBC2 (Need to confirm via fraps) I need to do more testing to see that 166.7 Mhz is stable after a few hours of gaming.
Why would this be? Is strange 2.6Ghz to 3.2Ghz and its slower??!? This just seems to be in BFBBC2 so far.

Losing FPS would seem my CPU isn't stable. But it did handle over an hour of prime95 stress testing with no errors. Odd... I will try lowering the FSB I guess.

Why not?

Let me give you a metaphor. You buy a car, it has an engine and transmissions. You'd think you can make the car go faster by making the engine spin faster, but what if the transmission belt starts to slip because it's going so fast so that any increases of spin rate will decrease the actual energy transmitted to the wheels beyond a certain point?

Kind of not a good metaphor for this, but a way to remind you that things aren't exactly as simple as they seem. Here's the purpose of having a clock signal in a digital circuit: to provide synchronization. Each transistor/circuit element has its own time constant as part of its transient response when the input changes, which means output doesn't change instantaneously. The longer the time constant the longer you have to wait from the time the input changes to the time the output stabilizes. Time constant is defined as the amount of time it takes for a output signal to reach within (1/e)% of its final value.

Then you have areas of the chip which has an overall time constant that is a function of all time constants of its constituents. The manufacturer then sets a clock frequency so that each period is long enough so that they are sure the entire circuit has stabilized before the next input change.

When you guys do the overclocking you're playing with that. Not all chips are made the same due to the inherent randomness in manufacturing. You can try to make the circuit go faster, but beyond a certain point one of the following may happen:

- one part of the circuit (a part with a long time constant) no longer functions correctly, but the rest is still fine
- a major part of the circuit no longer functions correctly, and the chip shuts down.

You will most obviously notice the second effect. The first effect is harder to notice. It will cause errors, which may or may not be corrected by the internal logic in a future clock cycle. Regardless, this can very well slow down your performance. Stress testing with just one application might not produce the right combination of switching to cause errors (remember that any transistor switching series is hugely complex).

So, after watching you guys try to push your chips faster and faster for a few weeks, I've finally decided to write something about it. A lot of text, but hope it helps.

source - electrical engineering