log in | register | forums
Show:
Go:
Forums
Username:

Password:

User accounts
Register new account
Forgot password
Forum stats
List of members
Search the forums

Advanced search
Recent discussions
- CashBook and other goodies (News:)
- June News Round-up (News:)
- Getting started with Bash on RISC OS (News:1)
- !Organizer updated to 2.28a (News:)
- Geminus (Gen:8)
- A new monitor for my RISC OS and Mac systems (News:1)
- May news round-up (News:)
- How likely is it that... (PP:2)
- NetSurf or Iconbar? (Site:1)
- GDPR and RISC OS (News:1)
Latest postings RSS Feeds
RSS 2.0 | 1.0 | 0.9
Atom 0.3
Misc RDF | CDF
Site Search
 
Article archives
The Icon Bar: General: StrongArm clock speeds
 
  StrongArm clock speeds
  Wilseus (01:25 3/10/2009)
  Phlamethrower (13:53 3/10/2009)
    Wilseus (20:12 3/10/2009)
      andypoole (20:36 3/10/2009)
      Acornut (21:59 3/10/2009)
        bhtooefr (22:06 3/10/2009)
          Wilseus (20:05 4/10/2009)
            bhtooefr (20:33 4/10/2009)
              Wilseus (22:32 4/10/2009)
                ninj (18:31 5/10/2009)
                  Charlie (18:52 13/10/2009)
                  pnaulls (22:11 13/10/2009)
                    Charlie (09:31 14/10/2009)
                      filecore (10:31 14/10/2009)
                        Charlie (17:16 14/10/2009)
                          SimonC (11:09 16/10/2009)
                  filecore (12:55 16/10/2009)
                    Charlie (14:27 16/10/2009)
 
Chris Wilson Message #111552, posted by Wilseus at 01:25, 3/10/2009
Member
Posts: 13
Would I be correct in thinking that the number printed on the bottom right of the chip is the clock speed in MHz, in the following picture, 233MHz?

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/d/d2/DEC_StrongARM.jpg
  ^[ Log in to reply ]
 
Jeffrey Lee Message #111554, posted by Phlamethrower at 13:53, 3/10/2009, in reply to message #111552
PhlamethrowerHot Hot Hot Hot Hot Hot Hot Hot Hot Hot Hot Hot Hot stuff

Posts: 15061
Yes, I'm fairly certain that would be the clock speed.
  ^[ Log in to reply ]
 
Chris Wilson Message #111555, posted by Wilseus at 20:12, 3/10/2009, in reply to message #111554
Member
Posts: 13
I'm a bit cheesed off about that then.

Why? Because I bought my StrongARM upgrade not long after they first came out, and I bought it being led to believe it was a 200 Mhz one.

Mine says "160" on it.
  ^[ Log in to reply ]
 
Andrew Poole Message #111556, posted by andypoole at 20:36, 3/10/2009, in reply to message #111555

Posts: 5552
I'm a bit cheesed off about that then.

Why? Because I bought my StrongARM upgrade not long after they first came out, and I bought it being led to believe it was a 200 Mhz one.

Mine says "160" on it.
Well 160 is nearly 200... tongue
  ^[ Log in to reply ]
 
Blind Moose Message #111558, posted by Acornut at 21:59, 3/10/2009, in reply to message #111555
Acornut No-eye-deer (No Idea)

Posts: 487
Mine says "160" on it.
Was that in the bottom right corner?
I thought they started with 200? Sniff
  ^[ Log in to reply ]
 
Eric Rucker Message #111559, posted by bhtooefr at 22:06, 3/10/2009, in reply to message #111558
Member
Posts: 336
Wonder if they overclocked a 160 MHz part to 202...
  ^[ Log in to reply ]
 
Chris Wilson Message #111561, posted by Wilseus at 20:05, 4/10/2009, in reply to message #111559
Member
Posts: 13
Maybe they did, although I'm sure I have seen 160MHz RISC PCs advertised...
  ^[ Log in to reply ]
 
Eric Rucker Message #111562, posted by bhtooefr at 20:33, 4/10/2009, in reply to message #111561
Member
Posts: 336
http://acorn.chriswhy.co.uk/32bit_Upgrades/Acorn_ART10_StrongARM160.html

Looks like it is a factory overclock.
  ^[ Log in to reply ]
 
Chris Wilson Message #111563, posted by Wilseus at 22:32, 4/10/2009, in reply to message #111562
Member
Posts: 13
Ahh, mystery solved. That's definitely the same as mine, although I guess it does mean that I'll probably not be able to overclock further by very much.

P.S. It's not actually quite the same as mine as mine does not have the capacitor C2 between the CPU and the DIP switches as it fell off years ago...
  ^[ Log in to reply ]
 
ninjah Message #111570, posted by ninj at 18:31, 5/10/2009, in reply to message #111563
Member
Posts: 288
There were reports of a number of StrongARMs from this revision overclocking to 300MHz and even beyond, which isn't bad for a 160MHz part. Never tried with mine, since really the processor speed isn't the thing limiting the system in the case of a RISC PC.
  ^[ Log in to reply ]
 
Charlie Message #111611, posted by Charlie at 18:52, 13/10/2009, in reply to message #111570
Member
Posts: 95
FWIW:
Having played with a fair few SA's (inc attaching a Peltier to a couple) I suspect 400mhz is the absolute maximum for any SA, ever...
As a rough rule of thumb:
-Rev J, K, R: Is likely to max out under 250-280mhz.
-Rev S: Could manage 350-380mhz.
-Rev T: Is unlikely to do better than 300mhz.
-Don't know about the 160mhz parts (don't have one).
-Yes, the S seems to over-clock better than the T.

Cooling?
A good passive HS is all you need for highest potential over-clocks though a HS-fan is probably the most practicable aid to air flow...
...active cooling (Peltier) is of no use at all.

The SA in my Omega is clocked to 306mhz (I think)- can't remember which Rev it is...
...not been tempted to play so far: Lack of info & willingness to break an irreplaceable computer.
  ^[ Log in to reply ]
 
Peter Naulls Message #111616, posted by pnaulls at 22:11, 13/10/2009, in reply to message #111570
Member
Posts: 317
There were reports of a number of StrongARMs from this revision overclocking to 300MHz and even beyond, which isn't bad for a 160MHz part. Never tried with mine, since really the processor speed isn't the thing limiting the system in the case of a RISC PC.
The fan on my 300MHz Kinetic stopped for a while without me noticing any ill-effects. However, I replaced it as soon as I could, for about a fiver from standard parts. Of course, there's still a reasonable heatsink on it without the fan.
  ^[ Log in to reply ]
 
Charlie Message #111619, posted by Charlie at 09:31, 14/10/2009, in reply to message #111616
Member
Posts: 95
@Peter:
May be a bit tricky to tell with the 300-Kinetic having a HS+Fan on it but do you know what revision the processor is? (!Sick could say)
My 233-Kinetic won't manage more than about 287mhz (Rev T) which was a bit of a disappointment given my least overclockable Rev S manages a stable 350mhz.

Thanks

Again, FWIW:
The most overclockable Rev S I have once lasted @ 400mhz long enough to run !Sick...
...having said that despite every motherboard timing mod I know of anything above about 385mhz on a RiscPC seems pointless as you 'lose' subsystems to timing issues - usually the on-board LAN is the first to disappear.
  ^[ Log in to reply ]
 
Jason Togneri Message #111622, posted by filecore at 10:31, 14/10/2009, in reply to message #111619

Posts: 3867
anything above about 385mhz on a RiscPC seems pointless as you 'lose' subsystems to timing issues - usually the on-board LAN is the first to disappear.
There are rpcs with onboard LAN?
  ^[ Log in to reply ]
 
Charlie Message #111631, posted by Charlie at 17:16, 14/10/2009, in reply to message #111622
Member
Posts: 95
No, there aren't.
It may have been less cryptic of me if I'd referred to it as the LAN card that plugs into the motherboard rather than one that plugs into the podule bus.

[Edited by Charlie at 17:18, 14/10/2009]
  ^[ Log in to reply ]
 
Simon Challands Message #111642, posted by SimonC at 11:09, 16/10/2009, in reply to message #111631
Elite
Right on, Commander!

Posts: 398
I used to have one of those APDL overclocked StrongARMs, but in the end I found that I wasn't really noticing the extra speed and clocked it back to whatever it was supposed to be and disconnected the fan.
  ^[ Log in to reply ]
 
Jason Togneri Message #111644, posted by filecore at 12:55, 16/10/2009, in reply to message #111570

Posts: 3867
the processor speed isn't the thing limiting the system in the case of a RISC PC.
  ^[ Log in to reply ]
 
Charlie Message #111647, posted by Charlie at 14:27, 16/10/2009, in reply to message #111644
Member
Posts: 95
Absolutely true, the mobo design had CPU's in the 10's of mhz in mind, not 100's...
...really limits what you can expect from a SA, and of course means there's a real law of diminishing returns the faster you go...
...still, I find my SA-380 is noticbly faster than than a SA-287 (or 233). Still not as 'fast' as my Kinetic-280.

Still, why does anyone do this to a computer? Because they can - the possibility of it being useful is a bonus.

Hmmm, one of my current projects is to see how much extra can be squeezed out of the motherboard itself.
  ^[ Log in to reply ]
 

The Icon Bar: General: StrongArm clock speeds