Some Medion pc's are overclocked

S

s.arcus

I am writting this for the benefit of others who might go through what
I've been recently. It might save them some headache and frustration.

I have recently had a client with a Medion PC bought in UK from PC
World (but they have been sold through Aldi and Lidl as well) of about
2 years old. I don't have the exact model at hand, but it was the one
with Ahtlon XP3400+ processor. I was called in because of stability
issues - system restarting all of a sudden and generally feeling
unstable. We've preventively changed the powersuppply (from 250W to
500W), but things only improved slightly.

Then it occurred to me the the CPU might be overheating somehow, so the
search was on for a software to read the CPU temperature. In the
process, like others elsewhere in the google groups found out, it turns
out that the motherboard is an MSI one, but it is not listed on MSI's
website or supported in anyway, but one that is "custom" built for
Medion. Not only that, but the frequencies for the processor and RAM
are locked, so no tweaking is available. Through trial and error, going
through every software on MSI website for probing the motherboard, it
turned out that one of their older utilities (I think PC Alert 3) was
able to read the temperature of the processor, speed of CPU fan,
voltages etc. The processor was showing between 69 and 74 degrees
celsius.

We went out, bought a new fan, placed thermal grease on the processor,
but only managed to gain 1 degree celsius!

Than I thought maybe the processor has been somehow worn out or
damaged, and it is just overheating of its own accord - so we went out
and bought a Sempron (socket A) at 2800. When that was fitted, the
system wouldn't boot up, no matter what. We've reset the BIOS, but the
system would still refuse to boot up. No jumpers on the motherboard to
tweak with.

In the end, guessing that the motherboard is locked on the frequencies
(maybe the serial number as well?) of the other processor, we went and
bought a Asus micro-ATX socket A motherboard. When that arrived, we
received the unexpected surprise - when placing the old processor (AMD
Ahtlon 3400) in the new motherboard, and let it be autodetected, it
actually showed up as an Athlon at 2500!!!! No wonder the processor was
overheating like mad. And no wonder the Medion motherboards are locked
down - it's not because they don't want you to overclock the processors
- it's because they already overclocked them for you :)

Which means that the lifespan of the computer - with a poor power
supply, and overclocked CPU is guaranteed to be seriously reduced.

On a side note, I went to another client few days after, with a Medion
PC, but with Intel processor. Same problems as the first client. We've
managed to read the temperature with Motherboard Monitor - and this
time it was in the 80 C! This time I told him straight away that he
should gut the pc (motherboard, cpu and power supply), otherwise it
will be a waste of time for both of us. This pc is just 1.5 years old.

I don't know if Medion have overclocked all their different models, but
it seems quite likely with their more recent ones. If BIOS is locked
and CPU temperature is high, most likely it is an overclocker. I am
wondering if this is not somehow against the law here in the UK.
Overclocking is seriously reducing the life of a PC (it seems to about
2 years average) and they are misleading the customers into believing
they are buying a system with XP3400, when it is a XP2500 really.
Anyway, it explains why they were so cheap at the time - I gueass soon
there will be a lot of useless machines lying around, when these
computers reach about 2 years old.
 
L

Livewire

I am writting this for the benefit of others who might go through what
I've been recently. It might save them some headache and frustration.

I have recently had a client with a Medion PC bought in UK from PC
World (but they have been sold through Aldi and Lidl as well) of about
2 years old. I don't have the exact model at hand, but it was the one
with Ahtlon XP3400+ processor. I was called in because of stability
issues - system restarting all of a sudden and generally feeling
unstable. We've preventively changed the powersuppply (from 250W to
500W), but things only improved slightly.

Then it occurred to me the the CPU might be overheating somehow, so the
search was on for a software to read the CPU temperature. In the
process, like others elsewhere in the google groups found out, it turns
out that the motherboard is an MSI one, but it is not listed on MSI's
website or supported in anyway, but one that is "custom" built for
Medion. Not only that, but the frequencies for the processor and RAM
are locked, so no tweaking is available. Through trial and error, going
through every software on MSI website for probing the motherboard, it
turned out that one of their older utilities (I think PC Alert 3) was
able to read the temperature of the processor, speed of CPU fan,
voltages etc. The processor was showing between 69 and 74 degrees
celsius.

We went out, bought a new fan, placed thermal grease on the processor,
but only managed to gain 1 degree celsius!

Than I thought maybe the processor has been somehow worn out or
damaged, and it is just overheating of its own accord - so we went out
and bought a Sempron (socket A) at 2800. When that was fitted, the
system wouldn't boot up, no matter what. We've reset the BIOS, but the
system would still refuse to boot up. No jumpers on the motherboard to
tweak with.

In the end, guessing that the motherboard is locked on the frequencies
(maybe the serial number as well?) of the other processor, we went and
bought a Asus micro-ATX socket A motherboard. When that arrived, we
received the unexpected surprise - when placing the old processor (AMD
Ahtlon 3400) in the new motherboard, and let it be autodetected, it
actually showed up as an Athlon at 2500!!!! No wonder the processor was
overheating like mad. And no wonder the Medion motherboards are locked
down - it's not because they don't want you to overclock the processors
- it's because they already overclocked them for you :)

Which means that the lifespan of the computer - with a poor power
supply, and overclocked CPU is guaranteed to be seriously reduced.

On a side note, I went to another client few days after, with a Medion
PC, but with Intel processor. Same problems as the first client. We've
managed to read the temperature with Motherboard Monitor - and this


I think the trading standards people need to hear about this. It sounds
virtually like fraud!
 
J

Joe

I would ask if they have paperwork showing they bought an XP3400 and if they
do I would advise them to sue because unless I am wrong AMD never made a
Socket A XP3400. A XP3200 was the fastest socket A CPU AMD ever made so it
could easily be proven that they were defrauded.
Joe
 
K

kony

I am writting this for the benefit of others who might go through what
I've been recently. It might save them some headache and frustration.

Except that the odds are extremely high that you are just
wrong, for whatever reason your understanding of the
situation has led to a false conclusion. I can attempt to
explain below but it can only be on the details you provide
which themselves may also be of limited accuracy based on
your understanding of the technology.

The rest of my post will probably seem rude, BUT it is
important to note where you might be going wrong and no
point beating around the bush about it.

I have recently had a client with a Medion PC bought in UK from PC
World (but they have been sold through Aldi and Lidl as well) of about
2 years old. I don't have the exact model at hand, but it was the one
with Ahtlon XP3400+ processor. I was called in because of stability
issues - system restarting all of a sudden and generally feeling
unstable. We've preventively changed the powersuppply (from 250W to
500W), but things only improved slightly.

What make and model power supply? If you bought a junk
supply, you'll not be reasonably able to expect any better
stabilty than anyone else has had with them.

If it was cheap, think about why... nobody pays a lot more
for no reason. Perhaps I'm drifting off on a tangent
though, perhaps it is a decent supply but this information
is conspicuously lacking in what is a hardware forum.

Then it occurred to me the the CPU might be overheating somehow, so the
search was on for a software to read the CPU temperature.

Does the bios menu have a report that may tell you?
In the
process, like others elsewhere in the google groups found out, it turns
out that the motherboard is an MSI one, but it is not listed on MSI's
website or supported in anyway, but one that is "custom" built for
Medion.

Sure, that's quite common with OEMs. If you want full
support from a manufacturer then you have to pay full retail
prices (or look for sales) on the parts. This is part of
the whole reason why prebuild systems are cheaper than
buying individual parts at retail- that the secondary costs
are reduced.

Now a word about temperature. Anyone will want to see an
accurate number as a gauge, but when there is no immediate
way to get this number, touch-testing a heatsink can be a
good way to guesstimate relative temp. Range is the issue,
if it's 75C or 85C either way it's too hot but if 38C or
45C, not so important. Just about anyone can easily feel
such a difference in temp but perhaps if you hadn't
touch-tested before, you'd need experience doing it.

A rough guide would be that 45C does not feel "hot", you can
leave your finger on the 'sink for a few seconds without
discomfort.
Not only that, but the frequencies for the processor and RAM
are locked, so no tweaking is available.

So? Of course they are, you paid for "X" speed so why would
they increase their support costs by allowing you to risk
system stability or lifespan by overclocking?
Through trial and error, going
through every software on MSI website for probing the motherboard, it
turned out that one of their older utilities (I think PC Alert 3) was
able to read the temperature of the processor, speed of CPU fan,
voltages etc. The processor was showing between 69 and 74 degrees
celsius.

Maybe, or maybe not. You have to use a current utility
known to support the board. Maybe it was accurate though,
we can't draw a conclusion based on the info you provide,
only note that it is suspect towards inaccuracy.

We went out, bought a new fan, placed thermal grease on the processor,
but only managed to gain 1 degree celsius!

Either:

A) You bought a junk heatsink or didn't install it
correctly

B) Case ventilation is poor, OR a very dusty environment
has clogged vent holes.

C) Temp report wasn't accurate, it wasn't at 69 or 74C.

Even in a very poorly cooled case, a good heatsink will have
no trouble keeping your CPU well below 74C.
Than I thought maybe the processor has been somehow worn out or
damaged, and it is just overheating of its own accord - so we went out
and bought a Sempron (socket A) at 2800. When that was fitted, the
system wouldn't boot up, no matter what. We've reset the BIOS, but the
system would still refuse to boot up. No jumpers on the motherboard to
tweak with.

Did it claim the Sempron was supported?
It is unfortunate that you're having problems but you seem
to jump to quite a few conclusions that are just not
productive.

In the end, guessing that the motherboard is locked on the frequencies
(maybe the serial number as well?) of the other processor,

No, that would be practically unheard of, odds are extremely
high that is not the case. Odds are it simply doesn't
support Sempron, but for all we know you might not have even
disconnected AC when clearing CMOS so it wasn't even
cleared.
we went and
bought a Asus micro-ATX socket A motherboard. When that arrived, we
received the unexpected surprise - when placing the old processor (AMD
Ahtlon 3400) in the new motherboard, and let it be autodetected, it
actually showed up as an Athlon at 2500!!!! No wonder the processor was
overheating like mad. And no wonder the Medion motherboards are locked
down - it's not because they don't want you to overclock the processors
- it's because they already overclocked them for you :)


No, that is not at all likely.
IF you had more experience you would have known that it is
very common and typical that a motherboard will first POST
with a CPU at a lower speed, including when set to
autodetect. This reduces the liklihood of a no-POST
situation, and all this is necessary is to enter bios, save
settings, and reboot if it didn't adjust it on the next boot
automatically. That is, you can check what the FSB is and
compare to the spec for the installed CPU. IF bios is set
to a lower FSB than CPU is spec'd for, it is obvious enough
why it was reported at a lower that stock, spec'd speed.

In short, no that is not evidence it was overclocked, it is
evidence you don't have much experience with Athlon
motherboards.


Which means that the lifespan of the computer - with a poor power
supply, and overclocked CPU is guaranteed to be seriously reduced.

Not applicable.
In fact, if you did actually have an Athlon 2500 that was
overclocked but stable at 3400 with default voltage, no it
would not even slightly reduce the lifespan of the system
compared to running a genuine 3400 instead.

But, we have no evidence it was overclocked.
Did you look at the CPU, the sticker, the part numbers?
Either the sticker clearly states what it is, or it was
forged. ALL of the forged CPUs thus far have visual
differencesand can be identified.

You do realize that what you're doing could loosely be
considered libel? It's sometimes a bit fuzzy how that
applies to usenet, but you would do well to stop jumping to
conclusions without more research first.

It could be that your system is poor, a lemon,
who-knows-what since we dont' have all details, but from
what has been supplied thus far, there is no evidence of
overclocking by them, but ironically enough, it appears that
you wanted to overclock it, the very thing you would
complain about them doing. So you want to complain about
not getting what you didn't pay for?
On a side note, I went to another client few days after, with a Medion
PC, but with Intel processor. Same problems as the first client. We've
managed to read the temperature with Motherboard Monitor - and this
time it was in the 80 C! This time I told him straight away that he
should gut the pc (motherboard, cpu and power supply), otherwise it
will be a waste of time for both of us. This pc is just 1.5 years old.

"Client"??

YOU ARE WORKING ON OTHER PEOPLES SYSTEMS?
You should be sued if you're gutting systems, costing others
money due to lack of ability to fix them properly.

I'm sorry but you should not be touching any systems. Not
theirs, not yours. You are at an end-user knowledge level,
perhaps advanced end-user but that's about all.

I don't know if Medion have overclocked all their different models,

Nor do you know if they overclocked that one, apparently.
... but
it seems quite likely with their more recent ones. If BIOS is locked
and CPU temperature is high, most likely it is an overclocker. I am
wondering if this is not somehow against the law here in the UK.

No, fictional problems are not against the law.
However, if the system as originally shipped, BEFORE
anything, and I mean any changes were made to it, wasn't
stable, then their product was defective.

There is a clear difference between defect and accusations
of fraud. You might've been entitled to some resolution
before you went in and fiddled with it, but not now.

Overclocking is seriously reducing the life of a PC (it seems to about
2 years average)

Nonsense. It'd take a whole page or more to explain why
you're wrong to jump to this conclusion but in short, no,
the specific details are what would determine this, but the
variable of only whether overclocked or not, doesn't... and
in your specific case where it seems the only variable was
whether it was a 2500 with a raised FSB or a 3400, not in
that case it would not make even the slightest difference
because technically they are the same CPU, same resultant
heat and power levels.
and they are misleading the customers into believing
they are buying a system with XP3400, when it is a XP2500 really.
Anyway, it explains why they were so cheap at the time - I gueass soon
there will be a lot of useless machines lying around, when these
computers reach about 2 years old.

You would do well to stop guessing.
 
S

Sleepy

I am writting this for the benefit of others who might go through what
I've been recently. It might save them some headache and frustration.

I have recently had a client with a Medion PC bought in UK from PC
World (but they have been sold through Aldi and Lidl as well) of about
2 years old. I don't have the exact model at hand, but it was the one
with Ahtlon XP3400+ processor. I was called in because of stability
issues - system restarting all of a sudden and generally feeling
unstable. We've preventively changed the powersuppply (from 250W to
500W), but things only improved slightly.

Then it occurred to me the the CPU might be overheating somehow, so the
search was on for a software to read the CPU temperature. In the
process, like others elsewhere in the google groups found out, it turns
out that the motherboard is an MSI one, but it is not listed on MSI's
website or supported in anyway, but one that is "custom" built for
Medion. Not only that, but the frequencies for the processor and RAM
are locked, so no tweaking is available. Through trial and error, going
through every software on MSI website for probing the motherboard, it
turned out that one of their older utilities (I think PC Alert 3) was
able to read the temperature of the processor, speed of CPU fan,
voltages etc. The processor was showing between 69 and 74 degrees
celsius.

We went out, bought a new fan, placed thermal grease on the processor,
but only managed to gain 1 degree celsius!

Than I thought maybe the processor has been somehow worn out or
damaged, and it is just overheating of its own accord - so we went out
and bought a Sempron (socket A) at 2800. When that was fitted, the
system wouldn't boot up, no matter what. We've reset the BIOS, but the
system would still refuse to boot up. No jumpers on the motherboard to
tweak with.

In the end, guessing that the motherboard is locked on the frequencies
(maybe the serial number as well?) of the other processor, we went and
bought a Asus micro-ATX socket A motherboard. When that arrived, we
received the unexpected surprise - when placing the old processor (AMD
Ahtlon 3400) in the new motherboard, and let it be autodetected, it
actually showed up as an Athlon at 2500!!!! No wonder the processor was
overheating like mad. And no wonder the Medion motherboards are locked
down - it's not because they don't want you to overclock the processors
- it's because they already overclocked them for you :)

Which means that the lifespan of the computer - with a poor power
supply, and overclocked CPU is guaranteed to be seriously reduced.

On a side note, I went to another client few days after, with a Medion
PC, but with Intel processor. Same problems as the first client. We've
managed to read the temperature with Motherboard Monitor - and this
time it was in the 80 C! This time I told him straight away that he
should gut the pc (motherboard, cpu and power supply), otherwise it
will be a waste of time for both of us. This pc is just 1.5 years old.

I don't know if Medion have overclocked all their different models, but
it seems quite likely with their more recent ones. If BIOS is locked
and CPU temperature is high, most likely it is an overclocker. I am
wondering if this is not somehow against the law here in the UK.
Overclocking is seriously reducing the life of a PC (it seems to about
2 years average) and they are misleading the customers into believing
they are buying a system with XP3400, when it is a XP2500 really.
Anyway, it explains why they were so cheap at the time - I gueass soon
there will be a lot of useless machines lying around, when these
computers reach about 2 years old.
Medion PCs are pretty tacky looking - Ive seen them at the Aldi store in my
town and I wouldnt touch one with a barge pole but are you sure of your
facts? Could it be the Asus board had the FSB set at 333mhz? XP2500s are
commonly overclocked to XP3200 simply by changing the FSB from 333 to 400.
Enthusiasts do it all the time especially with Mobile Athlons.Conversely if
you put an XP3200 in a board with the FSB set at 333 it would show up as a
XP2500. The fact they used a 250watt PSU in a system with a Athlon CPU is
pretty poor and shows its a poorly built system but claiming they
deliberately overclocked - you have to be 100% sure. Try that CPU in the
Asus board at 400FSB with a heatsink rated to XP3400 and see what temps you
get. Use Motherboard Monitor.
 
S

s.arcus

kony,

Thank you for taking the time to read and reply to my message. I do
sense a certain amount of irritation and suspicion in your reply - I am
sorry if something I have written has provoked this. As I did note in
the beginning, I've posted in the hope that some people might find it
useful, and as a starting point for those who might encounter similar
problems. I have presented all the facts that I had available and I
could remember at the time trying to make the post as useful as
possible. Sorry you didn't find it useful and also, sorry you
understood it as an invitation to pass qualificatives as regards to my
experience and knowledge.

I am going to try to add few bits of information, hoping it will
further add to the value of the post for those who might be interested
in the future.

Except that the odds are extremely high that you are just
wrong, for whatever reason your understanding of the
situation has led to a false conclusion. I can attempt to
explain below but it can only be on the details you provide
which themselves may also be of limited accuracy based on
your understanding of the technology.

The details which I've provided have indeed been limited in accuracy,
and one of the causes might very well be my limited understanding of
technology. But another cause for this limitation is the nature of
systems built by some OEM manufacturers, such as using customised
motherboards, which is NOT the case with all system manufacturers. If
this is wrong or right, it is not the place to discuss it - it just
precludes information gathering when troubleshooting.
The rest of my post will probably seem rude, BUT it is
important to note where you might be going wrong and no
point beating around the bush about it.



What make and model power supply? If you bought a junk
supply, you'll not be reasonably able to expect any better
stabilty than anyone else has had with them.

If it was cheap, think about why... nobody pays a lot more
for no reason. Perhaps I'm drifting off on a tangent
though, perhaps it is a decent supply but this information
is conspicuously lacking in what is a hardware forum.

Yes, you are right about the difference between cheap and expensive
power supplies - but I have heard this argument on suspiciously
numerous occasions to justify underpowered systems, which die out after
2 years of use. True, 450W good powersuply will most likely be better
then a 500W cheap one, but powering modern computers with 250W
powersupplies (be them cheap or expensive) is underpowered by most
official information, including processor manufacturers like AMD. And
this is done on a regular basis by most system manufacturers, large and
small. Situation is even worse when the PC includes a AGP video card
with a large amount of RAM, plus two optical drives. On top of all
that, a minor number of systems I have opened had good brand power
supply - most of them were small, and cheap. All the worse.

To come back to your question, yes, the power supply we've put in was a
cheap brand, as was the one we have taken out. I prefer 500W of cheap
power supply, over 250W of cheap power supply.
Does the bios menu have a report that may tell you?


No, the bios used in the above mentioned system did not have a section
on processor (or any other component) temperature.

Sure, that's quite common with OEMs. If you want full
support from a manufacturer then you have to pay full retail
prices (or look for sales) on the parts. This is part of
the whole reason why prebuild systems are cheaper than
buying individual parts at retail- that the secondary costs
are reduced.

Now a word about temperature. Anyone will want to see an
accurate number as a gauge, but when there is no immediate
way to get this number, touch-testing a heatsink can be a
good way to guesstimate relative temp. Range is the issue,
if it's 75C or 85C either way it's too hot but if 38C or
45C, not so important. Just about anyone can easily feel
such a difference in temp but perhaps if you hadn't
touch-tested before, you'd need experience doing it.

A rough guide would be that 45C does not feel "hot", you can
leave your finger on the 'sink for a few seconds without
discomfort.

To answer your question, no, we haven't touch-tested the temperature -
which, talking about accurate information, would seem rather
subjective, don't you think?

So? Of course they are, you paid for "X" speed so why would
they increase their support costs by allowing you to risk
system stability or lifespan by overclocking?


Funny, same argument I've read elsewere on the Internet coming from
Medion's support - and a perfectly reasonable one, if it wouldn't be
for the evidence which suggests other reasons for locking the
frequencies.
Maybe, or maybe not. You have to use a current utility
known to support the board. Maybe it was accurate though,
we can't draw a conclusion based on the info you provide,
only note that it is suspect towards inaccuracy.


I perfectly agree with you that the temp information in these
circumstances is not infallible. But considering that a software
released by the manufacturer of the motherboard has been used, I would
say there are very good chances that the reading was correct. I would
doubt that when customising the motherboard, they would have had any
reason to move registers around, thus making the reading incorrect. And
anyway, correlated with system instability and cpu overclocked, I would
say that it seems more accurate than "touch testing"

Either:

A) You bought a junk heatsink or didn't install it
correctly

We've purchased "Arctic Cooling Copper Silent", the one with 3 manual
speeds. My research and experience indicates they are quality, well
proven coolers. If you have different personal oppions, that's
something else. And it was fitted correctly.

B) Case ventilation is poor, OR a very dusty environment
has clogged vent holes.

Case ventilation is good, and all dust has been removed during a
previous session.

C) Temp report wasn't accurate, it wasn't at 69 or 74C.

Even in a very poorly cooled case, a good heatsink will have
no trouble keeping your CPU well below 74C.

Unless the processor is overclocked.

Did it claim the Sempron was supported?
It is unfortunate that you're having problems but you seem
to jump to quite a few conclusions that are just not
productive.

My omission again. An Athlon XP 2200 has been tried as well. Still no
success. Besides, if I remember correctly a Sempron 2800 (socket A) is
built on the same core as the Athlon XP, and so far I've had no trouble
running them in all boards which support Athlon XP.

No, that would be practically unheard of, odds are extremely
high that is not the case. Odds are it simply doesn't
support Sempron, but for all we know you might not have even
disconnected AC when clearing CMOS so it wasn't even
cleared.

AC has been disconnected when clearing CMOS.
No, that is not at all likely.
IF you had more experience you would have known that it is
very common and typical that a motherboard will first POST
with a CPU at a lower speed, including when set to
autodetect. This reduces the liklihood of a no-POST
situation, and all this is necessary is to enter bios, save
settings, and reboot if it didn't adjust it on the next boot
automatically. That is, you can check what the FSB is and
compare to the spec for the installed CPU. IF bios is set
to a lower FSB than CPU is spec'd for, it is obvious enough
why it was reported at a lower that stock, spec'd speed.

In short, no that is not evidence it was overclocked, it is
evidence you don't have much experience with Athlon
motherboards.

You are absolutely right again in the general assumption, unfortunately
that was not the case. The old processor has been run in the new
motherboard for several hours, including a Windows XP home edition
installation. During the process, I have entered the BIOS several
times, changed different options, and exited, saving changes. Processor
remained recognised as XP2500.

Not applicable.
In fact, if you did actually have an Athlon 2500 that was
overclocked but stable at 3400 with default voltage, no it
would not even slightly reduce the lifespan of the system
compared to running a genuine 3400 instead.

Let me remind you that just few paragraphs above, you actually agreed
with me: "> So? Of course they are, you paid for "X" speed so why
would
they increase their support costs by allowing you to risk
system stability or lifespan by overclocking?" Keep on changing your mind?
Besides, don't processor manufacturer warn everybody that the warranty
is void through any attempt at overclocking? I'm guessing they have a
good reason for that.

But, we have no evidence it was overclocked.
Did you look at the CPU, the sticker, the part numbers?
Either the sticker clearly states what it is, or it was
forged. ALL of the forged CPUs thus far have visual
differencesand can be identified.

You do realize that what you're doing could loosely be
considered libel? It's sometimes a bit fuzzy how that
applies to usenet, but you would do well to stop jumping to
conclusions without more research first.

It could be that your system is poor, a lemon,
who-knows-what since we dont' have all details, but from
what has been supplied thus far, there is no evidence of
overclocking by them, but ironically enough, it appears that
you wanted to overclock it, the very thing you would
complain about them doing. So you want to complain about
not getting what you didn't pay for?

If you would have read my post carefully, you would have seen I was
called in because of stabiliy issues (with system in stock settings, as
bought - which can't be changed anyway) - and not becuase we were
trying to overclock it. Viceversa, we would have tried to underclock it
if possible, to make it more stable, and that is why we have checked
the BIOS.
"Client"??

YOU ARE WORKING ON OTHER PEOPLES SYSTEMS?
You should be sued if you're gutting systems, costing others
money due to lack of ability to fix them properly.

I'm sorry but you should not be touching any systems. Not
theirs, not yours. You are at an end-user knowledge level,
perhaps advanced end-user but that's about all.

Nothing to comment here, obviously just personal stuff. Easy to write
about others, not so easy to work for real in real life. I don't
pretend to be the absolute expert, just looking for answers and hoping
others might find some in the information I've posted. As I have
demonstrated above, I have taken the suitable technical approach in
troubleshooting the problem, and I am still open to suggestions. Simply
being looked and talked down to doesn't seem like much of a productive
suggestion.
Nor do you know if they overclocked that one, apparently.


No, fictional problems are not against the law.
However, if the system as originally shipped, BEFORE
anything, and I mean any changes were made to it, wasn't
stable, then their product was defective.

There is a clear difference between defect and accusations
of fraud. You might've been entitled to some resolution
before you went in and fiddled with it, but not now.

It seems that you have missed the point. If I wanted a law suit, I
would have kept things as they were for "evidence". My purpose was to
help, if possible, other owners of similar systems who might be going
through similar difficulties. And yes, I would love if companies who do
such systems would change their ways in the future.

Nonsense. It'd take a whole page or more to explain why
you're wrong to jump to this conclusion but in short, no,
the specific details are what would determine this, but the
variable of only whether overclocked or not, doesn't... and
in your specific case where it seems the only variable was
whether it was a 2500 with a raised FSB or a 3400, not in
that case it would not make even the slightest difference
because technically they are the same CPU, same resultant
heat and power levels.

Already answered that. Maybe you would care for a bit more research
about overclocking? Same "resultant heat"? Come again?
You would do well to stop guessing.


All is left is just to question if you don't have some personal hidden
interests in the whole matter which makes you so biased and dismissive
of the information I've presented. Yes, there is a chance that I am
wrong, but I looked at facts, not dismissed the whole thing from the
top. Maybe you prefer systems with built-in obsolescence, though?
 
K

kony

The details which I've provided have indeed been limited in accuracy,
and one of the causes might very well be my limited understanding of
technology. But another cause for this limitation is the nature of
systems built by some OEM manufacturers, such as using customised
motherboards, which is NOT the case with all system manufacturers.

If referring to the major OEMs, yes it is the case. Where
you could have been to have not seen this for many years
will be a mystery.
If
this is wrong or right, it is not the place to discuss it - it just
precludes information gathering when troubleshooting.

Then why did you mention it? Debunking falsehoods is never
necessary if they're not put out there in the first place.



Yes, you are right about the difference between cheap and expensive
power supplies - but I have heard this argument on suspiciously
numerous occasions to justify underpowered systems, which die out after
2 years of use. True, 450W good powersuply will most likely be better
then a 500W cheap one, but powering modern computers with 250W
powersupplies (be them cheap or expensive) is underpowered by most
official information, including processor manufacturers like AMD.

That's because they overshoot. AMD does not requie 450W PSU
for any processor they make, in fact deferring to OEM
determination. What OEMs do that the casual user or
assembler does not is determine the actual need. Fact is, a
low-end modern system can run fine for years off a 250W PSU
if it is a decent quality unit. Medium tiered systems might
do it as well, largely depending on what makes it medium
rather than low-end. A faster CPU or another 512MB+ memory
is not much more power demand, while a video card,
especially a gamers card can be another matter.

Just about any mATX system is using 200-300W, usually closer
to 200W PSU. The OEM can effectively determine the real
power requirement so the remaining issue is quality of the
PSU... since an OEM may source much better quality in
200-300W than you would buy off a shelf in that wattage
range.

And
this is done on a regular basis by most system manufacturers, large and
small. Situation is even worse when the PC includes a AGP video card
with a large amount of RAM, plus two optical drives. On top of all
that, a minor number of systems I have opened had good brand power
supply - most of them were small, and cheap. All the worse.

I suspect you simply don't know decent power supplies. If
an OEM box has a major manufacturer's PSU in it, and it
bears that manufacturer's name rather than a 3rd party
relabeler who doesn't manufacture (like Antec), and if it
comes in a dull grey casing too, then to the untrained eye
it resembles a generic but is quite the opposite.

No, more ram and a 2nd optical drive are relatively light
loads, not a justification to jump from a 250W to 450W PSU.
However, I don't recall ever seeing a major OEM system with
a lot of memory (for it's era), and 2 optical drives, with
only 250W PSU. Care to name one make and model?



To come back to your question, yes, the power supply we've put in was a
cheap brand, as was the one we have taken out. I prefer 500W of cheap
power supply, over 250W of cheap power supply.

You might be causing problems then. 500W generic is
expected to last a couple years as you found problematic, as
the more common failure points such as caps, fan, diodes and
chopper BJTs are lower rated most often... how did you think
they managed to hit the low price points? Elvin magic?

To answer your question, no, we haven't touch-tested the temperature -
which, talking about accurate information, would seem rather
subjective, don't you think?

No I think it is prudent to do it failing another method to
obtain the temp. If you are setting up, servicing or
troubleshooting the system then you "need" to come to a
conclusion. While a touch-test is subjective, AFAIK the
typical human has a relatively constant body temperature and
their subjective interpretation of temp is "close enough",
it need not matter if "hot" is +-5C different from one
person to another, it's the ballpark temp that matters as
one does not try to shoot for only 5C under the threshold
for instability.

I'd also made the common considering you had no idea about
Athlon motherboards in general, and felt it beyond your
skill level to determine the specs for the board towards the
end of finding the addresses to interface with MBM5 or
similar to get a temp readout. It is most likely there is a
temp to be had but you'd already gone off on tangents about
overclocking by the OEM without merit.


Funny, same argument I've read elsewere on the Internet coming from
Medion's support - and a perfectly reasonable one, if it wouldn't be
for the evidence which suggests other reasons for locking the
frequencies.

Not funny at all, you are inept and guessed it must be their
fault. Again, the system might be flawed but you are only
guessing at the problem without evidence. I attempted to
provide a few hints to determine the CPU and it's o'c status
but had you even used one of several software tools to see
what the actual FSB frequency & multiplier was? If so, it
should have been quite clear whether the CPU was o'c or not.
What you had claimed as evidence was wholley insufficient
and even false towards your conclusion. In short, it
revealed you don't know what you're doing, are incompetent
to set it up... which is fine, that's why people buy OEM
systems (among other reasons) but when there is a problem
you are not fit to solve, you need to refrain from guessing
and do some research.


I perfectly agree with you that the temp information in these
circumstances is not infallible. But considering that a software
released by the manufacturer of the motherboard has been used, ...

No, NOT considering that because one cannot presume an
earlier software has a valid readout on a newer motherboard-
that it came from same manufacturer is quite irrelevant. If
it had been the other way around, if a newer software than
board, the situation changes as they are typically backwards
compatible at least for a period.
I would
say there are very good chances that the reading was correct.

Another jump. It might be correct, but you have no
reasonable expectation that it is and what you have
suggested is not correct, it matters not that it came from
same manufacturer but rather the date of release.

I would
doubt that when customising the motherboard, they would have had any
reason to move registers around, thus making the reading incorrect.

You guess again. Fact is, YES they do in fact use different
registers on different motherboards, particularly when the
technology changes over a period of time.
And
anyway, correlated with system instability and cpu overclocked, I would
say that it seems more accurate than "touch testing"

"IF" the report is correct, then yes it will naturally be
more accurate. Problem is your random assumptions and
further, that one can be a confirmation of the other. You
are not logically attacking the issue.

IF the system is overheating, that in itself may be the
problem but you use it as some support for your conclusion
that it's overclocked which is not supported by any evidence
and not even implied by the observed details. You guessed
it based on a prior guess that an "auto" or default POST on
a board would always result in the final FSB speed a CPU
uses, when in fact that is not true, rather boards do POST
at a lower FSB default fairly routinely when a new CPU is
installed.


We've purchased "Arctic Cooling Copper Silent", the one with 3 manual
speeds. My research and experience indicates they are quality, well
proven coolers. If you have different personal oppions, that's
something else. And it was fitted correctly.

Apparently it wasn't good, or wasn't installed correctly.
If both of those were true, you would not have had the CPU
overheating.

Do you even understand yet that if the CPU had been
overclocked by raising the FSB, it would NOT produce more
heat than if the CPU had been the "official" part, a genuine
3400?

Your incorrect guessing game has again caused further error.
You are incompetent and even worse, so full of
misconceptiosn that it will take longer for you to RElearn
things properly than someone who wasn't so prone to guessing
towards false conclusions. This may seem offensive but it
matters not- the end is necessarily that you realize where
you're going wrong else it persists, which is no good for
you in the long run.


Case ventilation is good, and all dust has been removed during a
previous session.

Perhaps, but after what's been read thus far, it would seem
best for you to doublt-check that, perhaps pointing a fan at
the open case to see if it improves temp much. Even though
your heatsink is not very good, in a well cooled case it
should be keeping the CPU cooler than it is. It would not
matter whether CPU was overclocked by FSB or not towards
heat generation, only the CPU family, MHz speed and vcore
will determine that providing the system load remains equal
which it should relatively speaking in same system.

Unless the processor is overclocked.

Nope, I already explained why.
However, if you want to consider overclocked CPUs, I have a
few I keep around for gaming systems, which have raised
vcore (CPU voltage), raised FSB, run significantly faster
than a 3400, and significantly cooler than 69-74C without
extreme measures- quiet, low-RPM fan on the heatsink, quiet
chassis cooling.

Any way you look at it, your account of the details does not
support your conclusion.


My omission again. An Athlon XP 2200 has been tried as well. Still no
success. Besides, if I remember correctly a Sempron 2800 (socket A) is
built on the same core as the Athlon XP, and so far I've had no trouble
running them in all boards which support Athlon XP.

At this point, it can be ignored. Primary focus is on why
the original system configuration is instable- which is what
should have been the goal all along but you got side-tracked
on this whold false-presumption-of-overclocking tangent.


You are absolutely right again in the general assumption, unfortunately
that was not the case. The old processor has been run in the new
motherboard for several hours, including a Windows XP home edition
installation. During the process, I have entered the BIOS several
times, changed different options, and exited, saving changes. Processor
remained recognised as XP2500.

Did you do the simple thing I had mentioned, looking at the
label on the CPU? You have not changed the appropriate bios
settings if you "always" see it as an Xp2500, because
changing the FSB, as required on many motherboards, will in
fact make the difference.



Let me remind you that just few paragraphs above, you actually agreed
with me: "> So? Of course they are, you paid for "X" speed so why
would

No, it's just that both ways you were wrong.


Besides, don't processor manufacturer warn everybody that the warranty
is void through any attempt at overclocking? I'm guessing they have a
good reason for that.

You have no reason to believe it's overclocked. You just
guessed and that guess is most likely wrong.


If you would have read my post carefully, you would have seen I was
called in because of stabiliy issues (with system in stock settings, as
bought - which can't be changed anyway)

Yes, since they can't be changed, that makes it even less
likely that CPU was overclocked. You had a basic problem-
CPU "appeared" to be running too hot. You then failed to
take adequate steps to determine without a reasonable doubt
that the temp was too high, then guessed that the temp was
too high because it was overclocked... when even if it were
overclocked, it would NOT raise the temp higher than it
would have been if it had been the official 3400 part, which
it most likely IS.
... - and not becuase we were
trying to overclock it. Viceversa, we would have tried to underclock it
if possible, to make it more stable, and that is why we have checked
the BIOS.

None of this is necessary. There is only one simple
resoltuion here:

Determine why it's overheating. NOT "do you think it's
overclocked", rather, why is the cooling system not keeping
it below what you "think" the temperate is.

If you lower the CPU speed below it's spec'd value, it will
be producing less heat but that does not address the
problem- which was why it was overheating. It was not
possible to do that from only having higher FSB, it would
have produced the same heat running at same MHz either way.



Nothing to comment here, obviously just personal stuff. Easy to write
about others, not so easy to work for real in real life. I don't
pretend to be the absolute expert, just looking for answers and hoping
others might find some in the information I've posted.

Nobody said you had to be an absolute expert, but it is
necessary to only go on solid facts and not jump to
conclusions particularly when a "client" is depending on the
result. If you can't fix a problem (which you have
demonstrated) you need to defer to someone else whose
expertise CAN solve that problem. By learning what was
necessary to solve the problem, your knowledge then grows.
Guessing and pointing blame only builds false illusions.

As I have
demonstrated above, I have taken the suitable technical approach in
troubleshooting the problem, and I am still open to suggestions.

As I have mentioned repeatedly, no you have not taken a
suitable, nor technical approach. You have guessed,
essentially built a house of cards that would only stand if
you further guesssed the CPU must be overclocked- when even
a very simple check could determine this.

If in fact it were overclocked, even then there was an
obvious solution, to demand the correct part from the OEM.
Any way this is read it's still not suitable technically.
Simply
being looked and talked down to doesn't seem like much of a productive
suggestion.

I have stated what needs to be done. I was even being
generous to point out where you went wrong so you could
avoid further errors. Go ahead and be offended- but either
learn from it or you are all the more negligent for
persistiing in false diagnosis and libelous claims against
OEM(s).


It seems that you have missed the point. If I wanted a law suit, I
would have kept things as they were for "evidence". My purpose was to
help, if possible, other owners of similar systems who might be going
through similar difficulties. And yes, I would love if companies who do
such systems would change their ways in the future.


That's just it- you have done nothing to help. What
would've helped is to pinpoint the problem, why the heat
isn't being removed effectively. There is no need to
consider whether the CPU were overclocked (which it does not
appear to be), only why the heat generated by a CPU running
as a 3400, is building up onto the point it seems to be
overheating. Doing anything before resolving that is only
negligent and a waste of time.



Already answered that. Maybe you would care for a bit more research
about overclocking? Same "resultant heat"? Come again?

Same family of CPU, same vcore, same frequency, results in
same heat generation. If you take a Xp2500 and raise the
FSB or multiplier till it appears to be a 3400, it produces
some heat as the genuine 3400 regardless of overclocking.

The simple fact is that your cooling system wasn't
effective... if it was overheating at all which we can't
even confirm since you didn't use appropriate measures to
confirm it, only a single old software which was not
supported nor implied by anyone to do adequate for the task.


All is left is just to question if you don't have some personal hidden
interests in the whole matter which makes you so biased and dismissive
of the information I've presented. Yes, there is a chance that I am
wrong, but I looked at facts, not dismissed the whole thing from the
top. Maybe you prefer systems with built-in obsolescence, though?



You have no reasonable justification for presuming
overclocked CPUs. You have an easy way to check the CPU for
it's spec'd speed. You have no reason to believe there's
any problem except that it's overheating.

You have wasted enough of our time, I hope the OEM sues you
if you persist instead of taking appropriate measures to
check your errors.
 
J

Joe

Kony

Arcus said as part of his post.

1) I don't have the exact model at hand, but it was the one with Ahtlon
XP3400+ processor.
2) ...so we went out and bought a Sempron (socket A) at 2800. When that was
fitted..

If these two statements are true the computer was overclocked. AMD never
made a socket A Ahtlon XP3400+ processor. The Ahtlon XP3200+ processor was
the end of the line for socket A.

Arcus never responded to me so I still question where he got that this was
supposed to be an Ahtlon XP3400+ processor.

Joe
 
K

kony

Kony

Arcus said as part of his post.

1) I don't have the exact model at hand, but it was the one with Ahtlon
XP3400+ processor.

Since OP is the one that specified it, we can presume that
was the initial impression, what it was supposed to be. Even
if it were XP3200 we can ignore the numerical mistake
because the indication was that the initial specification of
the system is what was in question.


2) ...so we went out and bought a Sempron (socket A) at 2800. When that was
fitted..

If these two statements are true the computer was overclocked.

No. Even if it were an XP3200 that showed as 3400 because
the motherboard had some minor variation in FSB speed that
put it a couple MHz beyond official values (which some
boards used to do, presumably to win benchmarks done by
reviewers) which bumped up the POST nomenclature to "3400",
the bottom line is still that the conclusion of what speed
the CPU was, was based on the variable of FSB speed. FSB
speed on socket A can be changed manually and any CPU, such
as a Xp2800 for example, set to a lower FSB speed when newly
installed in a motherboard, will display a different
processor name (lower number) in some cases.

I can understand someone not knowing this, wondering about
why, but not even bothering to check the label on the cpu
when they HAD removed that CPU? Sorry but that's just too
fishy to be believable or negligent when one then proceeds
to accuse an OEM of overclocking. No "normal" effort was
made to ascertain the CPU spec, no mention of the speeds.
All we have is an arbitrary guess and then accusations of
overclocking.
AMD never
made a socket A Ahtlon XP3400+ processor.

What's your level of confidence?
http://www.amdboard.com/barton3400.html

The Ahtlon XP3200+ processor was
the end of the line for socket A.

See above.

Arcus never responded to me so I still question where he got that this was
supposed to be an Ahtlon XP3400+ processor.

Please don't top -post and trim out the pages of text you
leave in your replies, thank you.
 
A

AN O'Nymous

I don't know if Medion have overclocked all their different models, but
it seems quite likely with their more recent ones.

Technically, they haven't broken any laws. If the customer explicitly
(and provably) asked them if their CPUs were overclocked when they
were, and they misrepresented that, then that would be illegal.

In this case, it does what it says on the box.
 

Ask a Question

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

You'll need to choose a username for the site, which only take a couple of moments. After that, you can post your question and our members will help you out.

Ask a Question

Top