QX9650 L739A644 + Blitz Extreme

[eva2000]

Look what arrived on a weekend (weird USPS EMS delivered to me on a Saturday! )

http://i4memory.com/reviewimages/cpus/QX9650_L739A644/QX9650_02.JPG

Closest batches I can find are


PcCI2iminal's L739A643 http://www.xtremesystems.org/forums/showthread.php?t=165636&highlight=L739A6%2A%2A
dominick32's L739A643 http://www.xtremesystems.org/forums/showthread.php?t=166370
nachthymnen's L739A664 http://www.xtremesystems.org/forums/showthread.php?t=166480

[eva2000]

System:

Intel Core 2 Extreme QX9650 L739A644 retail
CPU cooling = Swiftech G4 Storm/Thermochill 120.3/MCP655
NB chipset cooling = Radiical Chipset Block/Corsair Cool single 120mm fan Rad/MCP350
Asus Blitz Extreme 0804 bios (http://i4memory.com/showthread.php?t=4294)
128MB Gainward FX5200 PCI
2x1GB OCZ PC3-14400 Platinum (http://i4memory.com/reviewimages/memory/OCZ/DDR3/platinum/14400/photos/) - DDR3-1800 rated at 8-8-8-27 at 1.9v
500GB Seagate 7200.10 SATA on SATA1 Port
LiteOn 165H DVD Burner
Sony FDD
1KW OCZ ProXStream
WinXP Pro SP2


Coretemp 0.954 doesn't read the QX9650 VID properly but on AUTO vcore, bios reports 1.208v idle vcore and when I set vcore manually to 1.2375v vcore, bios reports 1.208v vcore as well. So VID probably = 1.2375v

Just in time that CPUZ v1.42 came out :)

http://fileshosts.com/intel/Asus/BlitzExtreme/g4storm/QX9650_L739A644/ocz/platinum/14400/9x/1_2div/333-667-65415_5481055_1t_1.2375-1.3-1.55-1.8-1.125-A_sronswoff_tbauto/cpuz_valid.png

I tried v1.42 with QX9650 L739A644 retail + Asus Blitz Extreme + 0904 bios but v1.42 picks up 1T CMD as 2T but v1.41 picks up CMD correctly as 1T heh

http://fileshosts.com/intel/Asus/BlitzExtreme/g4storm/QX9650_L739A644/ocz/platinum/14400/9x/1_2div/333-667-65415_5481055_1t_1.2375-1.3-1.55-1.8-1.125-A_sronswoff_tbauto/spi32m_14m47s796ms_tn.png (http://fileshosts.com/intel/Asus/BlitzExtreme/g4storm/QX9650_L739A644/ocz/platinum/14400/9x/1_2div/333-667-65415_5481055_1t_1.2375-1.3-1.55-1.8-1.125-A_sronswoff_tbauto/spi32m_14m47s796ms.png)

cpuz v1.42 dump file here (http://fileshosts.com/intel/Asus/BlitzExtreme/g4storm/QX9650_L739A644/ocz/platinum/14400/9x/1_2div/333-667-65415_5481055_1t_1.2375-1.3-1.55-1.8-1.125-A_sronswoff_tbauto/cpuz142.txt)

cpuz v1.41 dump file here (http://fileshosts.com/intel/Asus/BlitzExtreme/g4storm/QX9650_L739A644/ocz/platinum/14400/9x/1_2div/333-667-65415_5481055_1t_1.2375-1.3-1.55-1.8-1.125-A_sronswoff_tbauto/cpuz141.txt)

[eva2000]

QX9650 @4005Mhz

Needed 1.376v to boot into windows @4005Mhz but to complete Systool Quad 16M Pi test, needed 1.392v vcore (1.425v bios set). Also seems I've having some stability issues not sure if it's cpu, board or the new 0904 bios but at 4005Mhz at 1.392-1.400v vcore I managed to complete 32M run but after a few moments it rebooted the system. Haven't had this kind of instability in a long time - i.e. pass Super Pi 32M but reboot afterwards ? More investigating into bios settings is needed I guess :)

For now here's the Super Pi 32M run - which is a good 40-50 seconds faster than equivalent Conroe/Kentsfield time at 4005Mhz 9x445FSB 1:2 DDR3-1781Mhz 7-6-5-18 1T !

http://fileshosts.com/intel/Asus/BlitzExtreme/g4storm/QX9650_L739A644/ocz/platinum/14400/9x/1_2div/445-890-76518_5481085_1t_1.425-1.46-1.57-2.12-1.15-1.5_sron_swoff/spi32m_11m22s563ms.png

Anyone else running QX9650 on Blitz Extreme ???

[eva2000]

reserved #1

[eva2000]

reserved #2

[hiwa]

waiting for your test eve2000 ;) ;) ;) ;)

[PcCI2iminal]

reserved #3
:D

Well im not using an Extreme but with the Blitz Formula i have no issues for 4ghz @ 1.38v,its stable enough for Crysis and heavy benching.

[MuffinFlavored]

Very nice results.
It must just be my crap Gigabyte P35-DQ6, but I have to push 1.5875v to just get 3800MHz. Q6700 can't do 4000MHz. :(

But on topic, nice stuff!

[DMH]

Very nice results.
It must just be my crap Gigabyte P35-DQ6, but I have to push 1.5875v to just get 3800MHz. Q6700 can't do 4000MHz. :(

But on topic, nice stuff!
This is a Yorkfield;)they need less voltage then the Kentsfield

[eva2000]

waiting for your test eve2000 ;) ;) ;) ;) slowly they will come :)


reserved #3
:D

Well im not using an Extreme but with the Blitz Formula i have no issues for 4ghz @ 1.38v,its stable enough for Crysis and heavy benching. hehe was that on air or water ?

right now this QX9650 L739A644 needs 1.376v to boot 4005mhz but only semi stable with reboots at 4005mhz at 1.392-1.408v vcore on water cooling.. any lower vcore = BSOD heh

But it could be Blitz Extreme issue as my Q6600 L725A903 needed 1.432v for 3600Mhz prime95 on water while same cpu on Blitz Formula did 1.408v for 3600Mhz prime95 on air heh.


Very nice results.
It must just be my crap Gigabyte P35-DQ6, but I have to push 1.5875v to just get 3800MHz. Q6700 can't do 4000MHz. :(

But on topic, nice stuff! alot of factors i guess... could be vcore droop in your case and/or heat

[FUGGER]

George wont sleep for days now with the new processor :up:

[dominick32]

George,
Congrats on the QX. You may find this kind of crazy, but I think you are having stability issues because of your FSB. My findings have always led me to stability issues whenever FSB was near 445, 450.... I cannot even boot Windows after 450 FSB, 455+ it will freeze at post. So, FSB has been a huge limiting factor for air/water on these QX's. Just a little FYI from my personal experience.

Try 10 X 400 with 1.3625 (bios selected) vcore and if you have ample air cooling capacity I am pretty sure you should be quad prime stable set to (12meg cache setting in multiprime).

I know, because you are raising the multi, bus speed and ram will be slower. But I see you are running CAS7 6-6 on those sticks. To combat this I have found the best setting on a 4.0 Ghz overclock for me was:

10 X 400 , 1.3625 Vcore bios selected (1.31 after vdroop)
Ram at 1600 mhz, Timings: 6-5-5-18 (2.05v , 1T)

As you can see, even though you are lowering FSB, you still have the ability to run CAS6 and tighter timings + I am pretty sure you will be able to achieve 4.0 GHz low volts stability.

Let me know of any results.

[eva2000]

George wont sleep for days now with the new processor :up:hehe looks that way :D


George,
Congrats on the QX. You may find this kind of crazy, but I think you are having stability issues because of your FSB. My findings have always led me to stability issues whenever FSB was near 445, 450.... I cannot even boot Windows after 450 FSB, 455+ it will freeze at post. So, FSB has been a huge limiting factor for air/water on these QX's. Just a little FYI from my personal experience.

Try 10 X 400 with 1.3625 (bios selected) vcore and if you have ample air cooling capacity I am pretty sure you should be quad prime stable set to (12meg cache setting in multiprime).

I know, because you are raising the multi, bus speed and ram will be slower. But I see you are running CAS7 6-6 on those sticks. To combat this I have found the best setting on a 4.0 Ghz overclock for me was:

10 X 400 , 1.3625 Vcore bios selected (1.31 after vdroop)
Ram at 1600 mhz, Timings: 6-5-5-18 (2.05v , 1T)

As you can see, even though you are lowering FSB, you still have the ability to run CAS6 and tighter timings + I am pretty sure you will be able to achieve 4.0 GHz low volts stability.

Let me know of any results.Yeah been testing 10x multi and you're probably spot on 10x400FSB more stable than 9x445FSB at same 1.400-1.408v vcore. But still no boot until 1.376v for 4ghz regardless of FSB used.

But seems >4Ghz is looking closer to other QX9650 now.. i.e. 4152Mhz at 1.448v load for quad 16M systool Pi test looping several loops.. 4184Mhz at 1.448v passed one loop of quad 16M systool Pi test before rebooting heh.

[eva2000]

I like to use Systool (http://www.techpowerup.com/systool/) Quad 16M Pi test to find my feet with a new cpu (benchmarking -> cpu -> select 16M Pi test and check 4 threads box). Quad 16M Pi test uses ~1.2-1.3GB of memory, so you can't run Quad 32M Pi Systool test as it uses 2.6+ GB memory and for 32bit OS it will give you out of memory even if you have 4GB memory installed.

Systool Quad 16M Pi test scaling looks like this so far:

4005Mhz at 1.4375v bios set -> 1.408v idle/load
4137Mhz at 1.4750v bios set -> 1.448v idle/1.440v load
4152Mhz at 1.4875v bios set -> 1.456v-1.464v idle / 1.448v load
4180Mhz at 1.5000v bios set -> 1.472v idle / 1.464v load
4200Mhz at 1.5375v bios set -> 1.512v idle / 1.508v load


10min @4005Mhz at 1.392v load

http://fileshosts.com/intel/Asus/BlitzExtreme/g4storm/QX9650_L739A644/ocz/platinum/14400/10x/1_1div/400-400_88827_auto_2t_1.4375-1.4-1.55-1.8-1.125-1.5_srswoff_x635x67/prime95_load.png

Systool Quad 16M Pi pass at 1.508v load

(don't mind the times as i ran at 1:1 divider heh)

Load

http://fileshosts.com/intel/Asus/BlitzExtreme/g4storm/QX9650_L739A644/ocz/platinum/14400/10x/1_1div/420-420_88827_auto_2t_1.5375-1.4-1.55-1.84-1.125-1.5_srswoff_x635x67/systool_quad16m_load.png

Complete

http://fileshosts.com/intel/Asus/BlitzExtreme/g4storm/QX9650_L739A644/ocz/platinum/14400/10x/1_1div/420-420_88827_auto_2t_1.5375-1.4-1.55-1.84-1.125-1.5_srswoff_x635x67/systool_quad16m_complete.png

[Solarfall]

wow im pretty surprised how cool your cpu runs under load :eek: seems like a killer chip :up:

[eva2000]

Coretemp 0.95.4 isn't correct Coretemp 0.95.6 beta i just started to test shows closer load/idle temps to everest OSD report in screenshots heh

Coretemp 0.95.4 is about 5C under reported from Coretemp 0.95.6 beta.

http://fileshosts.com/intel/Asus/BlitzExtreme/g4storm/QX9650_L739A644/ocz/platinum/14400/9x/1_1div/333-333_88827_auto_2t_1.2-1.4-1.55-1.84-1.125-1.5_srswoff_x635x67/coretemp0956_everest.png

[eva2000]

Can now confirm, 9x445FSB instability wasn't related to FSB but related to lack of vcore as I bumped vcore right up and have no instability issues at 9x467FSB with Quad 16M Pi Systool test.

http://fileshosts.com/intel/Asus/BlitzExtreme/g4storm/QX9650_L739A644/ocz/platinum/14400/9x/1_1div/467-467_88827_auto_2t_1.5875-1.44-1.55-1.84-1.125-1.5_srswoff_x635x67/systool_quad16m.png

9x470FSB with CPU PLL = 1.50v

http://fileshosts.com/intel/Asus/BlitzExtreme/g4storm/QX9650_L739A644/ocz/platinum/14400/9x/1_1div/470-470_88827_auto_2t_1.5875-1.44-1.55-1.84-1.125-1.5_srswoff_x635x67/systool_quad16m.png

[dj883u2]

Where download Coretemp 0.95.6 beta?
By:up:

[eva2000]

coretemp author is going giving it out via email requests so will ask if it's okay to share :)

Well either I have Asus Blitz Extreme 0904 bios issues or I probably have a below average QX9650 as I can't even complete 1M @11x400FSB = 4400Mhz at 1.65v bios (1.608v load) - half way through 1M Super Pi run it reboots heh.

Might have to move QX9650 cpu to my Asus Blitz Formula to see what's up.

[VictorWang]

nice review Geroge. lol
but poor chip :(

[Chri$ch]

i had same problem with a QX9650 ES on Blitz Formula & Maximus Formula :down:

I think it is the CPU

[dj883u2]

coretemp author is going giving it out via email requests so will ask if it's okay to share :)

Well either I have Asus Blitz Extreme 0904 bios issues or I probably have a below average QX9650 as I can't even complete 1M @11x400FSB = 4400Mhz at 1.65v bios (1.608v load) - half way through 1M Super Pi run it reboots heh.

Might have to move QX9650 cpu to my Asus Blitz Formula to see what's up.

Ok For coretemp:up:
Thanks:)

[eva2000]

i had same problem with a QX9650 ES on Blitz Formula & Maximus Formula :down:

I think it is the CPU Yeah it's looking like it's cpu :(

Asus Blitz Formula 1205 bios blashed, same QX9650 needs 1.408v to get into windows air cooled. 1.35v bios reboots before getting into windows.

http://fileshosts.com/intel/Asus/Blitzformula/results/ultra120ex/QX9650_L739A644/team/6400c3/10x/533/400-400_44412_auto_1.4375-1.42-1.57-2.2-1.125-1.5/systool_quad16m.png

[xgman]

Look what arrived on a weekend (weird USPS EMS delivered to me on a Saturday! )



Closest batches I can find are


PcCI2iminal's L739A643 http://www.xtremesystems.org/forums/showthread.php?t=165636&highlight=L739A6%2A%2A
dominick32's L739A643 http://www.xtremesystems.org/forums/showthread.php?t=166370
nachthymnen's L739A664 http://www.xtremesystems.org/forums/showthread.php?t=166480


You have the exact same batch # as I do.
EDIT: sorry mines the 664 one, not 644.

[eva2000]

xgman, how's you cpu doing?

[xgman]

George,
Congrats on the QX. You may find this kind of crazy, but I think you are having stability issues because of your FSB. My findings have always led me to stability issues whenever FSB was near 445, 450.... I cannot even boot Windows after 450 FSB, 455+ it will freeze at post. So, FSB has been a huge limiting factor for air/water on these QX's. Just a little FYI from my personal experience.

Try 10 X 400 with 1.3625 (bios selected) vcore and if you have ample air cooling capacity I am pretty sure you should be quad prime stable set to (12meg cache setting in multiprime).

I know, because you are raising the multi, bus speed and ram will be slower. But I see you are running CAS7 6-6 on those sticks. To combat this I have found the best setting on a 4.0 Ghz overclock for me was:

10 X 400 , 1.3625 Vcore bios selected (1.31 after vdroop)
Ram at 1600 mhz, Timings: 6-5-5-18 (2.05v , 1T)

As you can see, even though you are lowering FSB, you still have the ability to run CAS6 and tighter timings + I am pretty sure you will be able to achieve 4.0 GHz low volts stability.

Let me know of any results.


I heard that if you can set Static Read Value to "9", it helps to get higher fsb. I think with the Storm G5 he can set volts to 1.5-1.55 without harm. I have my phase running at 1.567v (reported). I find the 9650 needs higher volts to get in the high 4xxx's and also higher fsb stable.

George, I had a bit of a hard time getting this cpu up there at first, and it does seem to need more vcore than those ES samples, but under phase it now seems mostly stable at 4800 mhz approaching 1.6v set in bios, Odd thing is with sub zero temps, coretemp 95.4 reads the first two cores 8 deg higher than the 2nd 2. Is this normal. I know the readings for sub zero are not accurate obviously, but why so much difference between sets of cores. All that said, I think that this is one of those times when the ES's were really hand picked for the most part.

[xgman]

xgman, how's you cpu doing?


It just seems to need lots of vcore and bios tweaking galore. I'm on a p5k dlx. At first I tried it on a P5e3 dlx and 4GB ddr3 (2x2gb) and it was very hard to figure out what settings to use for best results and the 8gb ram didn't help. Then I fried that board, so I went back to the P5K dlx with 2gb ram. Now it's much easier to control, but no chance of hitting the high fsb I was used to on the qx6850. No matter, the cpu does clock higher now, and you just have to try different timings and settings in the bios to get control of this thing. Finally seems stable enough at 436/524ish x 11. It will go a bit higher but looses stability along the way. Definitely needs high 1.5's vcore to get there, but it seems like there is a point where it starts to not help anymore unless you have dual stage phase or better.

[eva2000]

coretemp can't read sub zero temps, so that's all over the place on sub zero heh

I'm just beside myself right now as to how poor this cpu is compared to all the QX9650 results out there retail or ES :(

[xgman]

coretemp can't read sub zero temps, so that's all over the place on sub zero heh

I'm just beside myself right now as to how poor this cpu is compared to all the QX9650 results out there retail or ES :(


I still don't understand why there would be such a huge difference between the 1st 2 and 2nd 2 sets of cores. I know the evap head is seated flat.

Anyway, go back to basics on your bios settings and work back up. It took allot of trial and error for me to figure out the differences is settings between this and the previous QX. You may still have a dud, but I thought so at first also.

[HDCHOPPER]

u will get it eva ! besides who needs sleep hahhahahahaa

[Dynasty]

coretemp can't read sub zero temps, so that's all over the place on sub zero heh

I'm just beside myself right now as to how poor this cpu is compared to all the QX9650 results out there retail or ES :(

swap the board out an try maximus formula or XE.....with appropiate bios.
you know the deal, I bet that qx9650 of yours would sing
under my P5K-Prem.(vmodded)......:D

my L739A663 under P5K. if you need more compares..

http://img87.imageshack.us/img87/1630/qx96503dtestpo0jx8.gif[/URL]

[eva2000]

I still don't understand why there would be such a huge difference between the 1st 2 and 2nd 2 sets of cores. I know the evap head is seated flat.

Anyway, go back to basics on your bios settings and work back up. It took allot of trial and error for me to figure out the differences is settings between this and the previous QX. You may still have a dud, but I thought so at first also. it's normal some cpus just have different temperatures on each set of cores


u will get it eva ! besides who needs sleep hahhahahahaa yeah i had my sleep now.. again to figure this cpu out :)


swap the board out an try maximus formula or XE.....with appropiate bios.
you know the deal, I bet that qx9650 of yours would sing
under my P5K-Prem.(vmodded)......:D

my L739A663 under P5K. if you need more compares..

http://img87.imageshack.us/img87/1630/qx96503dtestpo0jx8.gif
Have you experienced anything similar on other boards with your QX9650 i.e. crap oc's on one board but excellent on P5K-Premium of yours ?

[eva2000]

Well so far it's even worse on Gigabyte X38-DQ6 F6B bios with this QX9650 L739A644, 4000mhz instant reboot even at 1.428v even kept FSB low at 333FSB x12 to rule out FSB.

More tests to come

[Dynasty]

Have you experienced anything similar on other boards with your QX9650 i.e. crap oc's on one board but excellent on P5K-Premium of yours ?

well only with my Asus Striker II/780i board of mine thats it....:p:
its an pita trying to get this thing going right with 8800 ultras/qx9650...

Both my P5K-Prem. & Maximus. SE run the qx9650 just fine..
if you try other boards and still same poor OC you know the deal....:(

[eva2000]

Yeah it's looking like a below average QX9650 compared to ones around :(

Flashed to F7D bios now for more tests..

@4000Mhz - 12x333FSB at 1.5v bios (1.488v cpuz idle -> fluctuating between 1.440v to 1.456v cpuz load)

First 2 hrs of Prime95 showed 1.440v constantly

http://fileshosts.com/intel/Gigabyte/x38_dq6_results/QX9650/ultra120/corsair/10000c5d/12x/3.2b/333-533_55518_446-42-48A_2T_1.5-0.45v_Nv_0.15_0.15_std/prime95_load1.png

Then changed to 1.456v in CPUZ...

http://fileshosts.com/intel/Gigabyte/x38_dq6_results/QX9650/ultra120/corsair/10000c5d/12x/3.2b/333-533_55518_446-42-48A_2T_1.5-0.45v_Nv_0.15_0.15_std/prime95_load2_1456v.png

1.440v - 1.408v = 0.32v more vcore needed than on Asus Blitz Extreme water cooled.




Leaving the cpu oc'ing aside for the moment, decided to figure out the divider and timing performance of the Gigabyte X38-DQ6 and I must say end result is pretty good even if the dividers don't always work on all straps variations.

Here's Super Pi 32M @9x445FSB (2.5A divider = 4:5) 556Mhz 4-4-4-8 at 2.48v (don't know why it needs so much vdimm as Corsair 10000C5D did 570Mhz 4-4-4-x at 2.35v on Asus P35 chipset boards.

Straight boot from bios (NO memset changes in windows)

http://fileshosts.com/intel/Gigabyte/x38_dq6_results/QX9650/ultra120/corsair/10000c5d/9x/2.5a/445-556_4448_336-30-5_trd7-1_2T_1.5-0.7v_Nv_0.2_0.35_turbo/cpuz_valid.png

http://fileshosts.com/intel/Gigabyte/x38_dq6_results/QX9650/ultra120/corsair/10000c5d/9x/2.5a/445-556_4448_336-30-5_trd7-1_2T_1.5-0.7v_Nv_0.2_0.35_turbo/spi32m_11m28s735ms.png

http://fileshosts.com/intel/Gigabyte/x38_dq6_results/QX9650/ultra120/corsair/10000c5d/9x/2.5a/445-556_4448_336-30-5_trd7-1_2T_1.5-0.7v_Nv_0.2_0.35_turbo/everest.png

Only 6.172 seconds slower than QX9650 @9x445FSB 1:2 DDR3-1780Mhz 7-6-5-18 1T on Asus Blitz Extreme (P35 chipset)

http://fileshosts.com/intel/Asus/BlitzExtreme/g4storm/QX9650_L739A644/ocz/platinum/14400/9x/1_2div/445-890-76518_5481085_1t_1.425-1.46-1.57-2.12-1.15-1.5_sron_swoff/spi32m_11m22s563ms.png

[xgman]

Eva, it is looking like your 9650 may in fact be on the slow side of average. Also, I've never had any luck with gigabyte anything. More power to you. Maybe you should consider my PM if that is possible. I alos find it rather interesting that the few 9770 es's that are around don't really seem any better than the 9650 es's, and in fact some seem worse. I think in this case the 9650 es's were really the top pick of what Intel can dfo with this process at the moment whereas the qx6850 es's ended up being just about the same as the retails.

[MorGo7h]

Good clocks ;)

[eva2000]

Eva, it is looking like your 9650 may in fact be on the slow side of average. Also, I've never had any luck with gigabyte anything. More power to you. Maybe you should consider my PM if that is possible. I alos find it rather interesting that the few 9770 es's that are around don't really seem any better than the 9650 es's, and in fact some seem worse. I think in this case the 9650 es's were really the top pick of what Intel can dfo with this process at the moment whereas the qx6850 es's ended up being just about the same as the retails.Yeah thanks for the pm.. it's hard even think of forking out more after experiencing the disappointment of this cpu's oc'ing potential on air/water


Good clocks ;) thanks.. just wish they were better heh

Looks like Gigabyte X38-DQ6 vcore droop gets worse the higher you set vcore in bios. At 1.55v bios set vcore you get 1.54v idle but 1.488v load. Still for 4.1Ghz mark, X38-DQ6 is requiring around 0.05v more vcore than what I needed on Asus Blitz Formula/Extreme.

Still depressing to see this QX9650 needing this amount of vcore just for 4100Mhz :(

Straight boot from bios (NO memset changes)

http://fileshosts.com/intel/Gigabyte/x38_dq6_results/QX9650/ultra120/corsair/10000c5d/9x/2.5a/456-570_4448_447-30-5_trd7-1_2T_1.55-0.80v_Nv_0.2_0.35_turbo/cpuz_valid.png

http://fileshosts.com/intel/Gigabyte/x38_dq6_results/QX9650/ultra120/corsair/10000c5d/9x/2.5a/456-570_4448_447-30-5_trd7-1_2T_1.55-0.80v_Nv_0.2_0.35_turbo/spi32_11m11s172ms.png

http://fileshosts.com/intel/Gigabyte/x38_dq6_results/QX9650/ultra120/corsair/10000c5d/9x/2.5a/456-570_4448_447-30-5_trd7-1_2T_1.55-0.80v_Nv_0.2_0.35_turbo/everest.png

[eva2000]

Swapped out Corsair 10000C5D for SuperTalent PC2-8000 memory. Seems SuperTalent likes tight subtimings fine but still like previous tests prefers CAS5 to CAS4.

http://fileshosts.com/intel/Gigabyte/x38_dq6_results/QX9650/ultra120/supertalent/8000/8x/3a/417-625_5549_336-30-4_trd7-1_2T_1.4-0.75v_Nv_0.15_0.30_turbo/spi32m_13m22s813ms.png

http://fileshosts.com/intel/Gigabyte/x38_dq6_results/QX9650/ultra120/supertalent/8000/10x/3a/415-622_5549_336-30-4_trd7-1_2T_1.65-0.75v_Nv_0.15_0.30_turbo/spi32m_11m16s078ms.png

http://fileshosts.com/intel/Gigabyte/x38_dq6_results/QX9650/ultra120/supertalent/8000/10x/3a/415-622_5549_336-30-4_trd7-1_2T_1.65-0.75v_Nv_0.15_0.30_turbo/everest.png



Starting to get the hang of tweaking memory performance on Gigabyte X38-DQ6 F7D bios.. Supertalent PC2-8000 do run a bit easier than Corsair 10000C5D as they can handle the much tighter timings and performance level.

All results below are done straight from bios boot up (memset only used for display purposes of timings) :)

http://fileshosts.com/intel/Gigabyte/x38_dq6_results/QX9650/ultra120/supertalent/8000/9x/2.4b/462-554_5449_436-30-5_trd8-1_2T_1.65-0.8v_Nv_0.25_0.35_turbo/spi32m_11m10s312ms.png

Very close to sub 11min 32M time now :)

http://fileshosts.com/intel/Gigabyte/x38_dq6_results/QX9650/ultra120/supertalent/8000/9x/2.5a/464-580_5449_446-30-5_trd8-1_2T_1.65-0.8v_Nv_0.25_0.35_turbo/cpuz_valid.png

http://fileshosts.com/intel/Gigabyte/x38_dq6_results/QX9650/ultra120/supertalent/8000/9x/2.5a/464-580_5449_446-30-5_trd8-1_2T_1.65-0.8v_Nv_0.25_0.35_turbo/spi32m_11m03s937ms.png

http://fileshosts.com/intel/Gigabyte/x38_dq6_results/QX9650/ultra120/supertalent/8000/9x/2.5a/464-580_5449_446-30-5_trd8-1_2T_1.65-0.8v_Nv_0.25_0.35_turbo/everest_tn.png

[oscar3d]

Very, very good...

[eva2000]

Thanks seems on Gigabyte X38-DQ6 my limit is around 4176Mhz while on Asus Blitz series around 4234Mhz - well short of those gems doing 4.5-4.7ghz air/water :(

[Aivas47a]

Eva I'm seeing higher than expected vcore to run qx9650 stable on Maximus Extreme. With 1.55 vcore in bios (1.53 actual) I am OCCT stable at 9x450. Chipset seems to require higher voltages than I expected as well, for stability at above speeds I need 1.6v NB and 1.54 FSB Term. I'll post some screenies tomorrow. Haven't tried 10x400 to see how much that will let me drop voltages. Also have P5K3 Deluxe board on hand, would like to try same chip in that board which has been very good quadcore overclocker.

High fsb (450+) also seems more difficult to achieve on qx9650 than on G0 Q6600, at least on Max. Extreme board.

EDIT: OCCT stability at 10x400 only seems to require around 1.48 vcore, .05 less than 9x450. Hate to give up the full 1800Mhz spec speed of my ram however!

[eva2000]

Interesting guess it does depend on the board for how it handles vcore... FSB seems to be more related to cpu.. this QX9650 L739A644 easily does 470-475FSB on cpu pll volts = 1.5v on Asus board.

Swapped to 2x1GB Crucial Ballistix Tracer PC2-8500 memory and seems to be the best memory so far for X38-DQ6 :)

Decided to do some single and quad Super Pi 32M tests at QX9770 speeds of 8x400FSB = 3200Mhz at stock vcore in bios :D

Straight boot from bios. Seems for 2.66C (3:4) divider, cpuz v1.42 and memset as well as coretemp 0.9.5.6 don't seem to recognise the divider and memory clocks properly. Only app that does is Everest Ultimate :)

http://fileshosts.com/intel/Gigabyte/x38_dq6_results/QX9650/ultra120/crucial/8500t_nk/8x/2.66c/400-533_4448_536-35-5_trd6-1_2T_1.25-0.5v_Nv_0.15_0.30_turbo_900mv_100psmch/cpuz_valid.png

http://fileshosts.com/intel/Gigabyte/x38_dq6_results/QX9650/ultra120/crucial/8500t_nk/8x/2.66c/400-533_4448_536-35-5_trd6-1_2T_1.25-0.5v_Nv_0.15_0.30_turbo_900mv_100psmch/everest.png

http://fileshosts.com/intel/Gigabyte/x38_dq6_results/QX9650/ultra120/crucial/8500t_nk/8x/2.66c/400-533_4448_536-35-5_trd6-1_2T_1.25-0.5v_Nv_0.15_0.30_turbo_900mv_100psmch/spi1m_14s422ms.png

http://fileshosts.com/intel/Gigabyte/x38_dq6_results/QX9650/ultra120/crucial/8500t_nk/8x/2.66c/400-533_4448_536-35-5_trd6-1_2T_1.25-0.5v_Nv_0.15_0.30_turbo_900mv_100psmch/spi32m_13m48s984ms_tn.png (http://fileshosts.com/intel/Gigabyte/x38_dq6_results/QX9650/ultra120/crucial/8500t_nk/8x/2.66c/400-533_4448_536-35-5_trd6-1_2T_1.25-0.5v_Nv_0.15_0.30_turbo_900mv_100psmch/spi32m_13m48s984ms.png)

Now quad Super Pi 32M :)

http://fileshosts.com/intel/Gigabyte/x38_dq6_results/QX9650/ultra120/crucial/8500t_nk/8x/2.66c/400-533_4448_536-35-5_trd6-1_2T_1.25-0.5v_Nv_0.15_0.30_turbo_900mv_100psmch/quad_superpi32m_01_tn.jpg (http://fileshosts.com/intel/Gigabyte/x38_dq6_results/QX9650/ultra120/crucial/8500t_nk/8x/2.66c/400-533_4448_536-35-5_trd6-1_2T_1.25-0.5v_Nv_0.15_0.30_turbo_900mv_100psmch/quad_superpi32m_01.jpg)

http://fileshosts.com/intel/Gigabyte/x38_dq6_results/QX9650/ultra120/crucial/8500t_nk/8x/2.66c/400-533_4448_536-35-5_trd6-1_2T_1.25-0.5v_Nv_0.15_0.30_turbo_900mv_100psmch/quad_superpi32m_02_tn.jpg (http://fileshosts.com/intel/Gigabyte/x38_dq6_results/QX9650/ultra120/crucial/8500t_nk/8x/2.66c/400-533_4448_536-35-5_trd6-1_2T_1.25-0.5v_Nv_0.15_0.30_turbo_900mv_100psmch/quad_superpi32m_02.jpg)

http://fileshosts.com/intel/Gigabyte/x38_dq6_results/QX9650/ultra120/crucial/8500t_nk/8x/2.66c/400-533_4448_536-35-5_trd6-1_2T_1.25-0.5v_Nv_0.15_0.30_turbo_900mv_100psmch/quad_superpi32m_03_tn.jpg (http://fileshosts.com/intel/Gigabyte/x38_dq6_results/QX9650/ultra120/crucial/8500t_nk/8x/2.66c/400-533_4448_536-35-5_trd6-1_2T_1.25-0.5v_Nv_0.15_0.30_turbo_900mv_100psmch/quad_superpi32m_03.jpg)

http://fileshosts.com/intel/Gigabyte/x38_dq6_results/QX9650/ultra120/crucial/8500t_nk/8x/2.66c/400-533_4448_536-35-5_trd6-1_2T_1.25-0.5v_Nv_0.15_0.30_turbo_900mv_100psmch/quad_superpi32m_04_tn.jpg (http://fileshosts.com/intel/Gigabyte/x38_dq6_results/QX9650/ultra120/crucial/8500t_nk/8x/2.66c/400-533_4448_536-35-5_trd6-1_2T_1.25-0.5v_Nv_0.15_0.30_turbo_900mv_100psmch/quad_superpi32m_04.jpg)

http://fileshosts.com/intel/Gigabyte/x38_dq6_results/QX9650/ultra120/crucial/8500t_nk/8x/2.66c/400-533_4448_536-35-5_trd6-1_2T_1.25-0.5v_Nv_0.15_0.30_turbo_900mv_100psmch/spi32m_quad32m_tn.png (http://fileshosts.com/intel/Gigabyte/x38_dq6_results/QX9650/ultra120/crucial/8500t_nk/8x/2.66c/400-533_4448_536-35-5_trd6-1_2T_1.25-0.5v_Nv_0.15_0.30_turbo_900mv_100psmch/spi32m_quad32m.png)

[Langley]

I have one like this
http://www.pctunerup.com/up/results/_200711/20071128125151_PIC_0010.JPG
I have a difference of 6-7°c in core 0 form the others core with coretemp and i am working for a prime stability at 430 x 10 1,46Vcore on liquid, but after 2h of prime the core 0 have a error, i think there's a lot of problem with temp about 62° on full after 1h... good test eva u have a pvt! ;)

[oscar3d]

eve2000, I just want to say thanks....:clap:

I was at the moment thinking about how my QX9650 could perform at 3200 (8x400). I see the volts in your CPU-Z, how much VCORE are you seting for this config?

[eva2000]

I have one like this
http://www.pctunerup.com/up/results/_200711/20071128125151_PIC_0010.JPG[/img]
I have a difference of 6-7°c in core 0 form the others core with coretemp and i am working for a prime stability at 430 x 10 1,46Vcore on liquid, but after 2h of prime the core 0 have a error, i think there's a lot of problem with temp about 62° on full after 1h... good test eva u have a pvt! ;)nice clocks still 4.3ghz at 1.46v :)


eve2000, I just want to say thanks....:clap:

I was at the moment thinking about how my QX9650 could perform at 3200 (8x400). I see the volts in your CPU-Z, how much VCORE are you seting for this config?

1.25v bios set :)

Some 3dmarks with new video card

512MB Inno3D 8800GT OC Edition 650/1900 cards :cool:

http://i4memory.com/reviewimages/videocards/inno3d/8800GT_OC/photos/Inno3d_8800GT_01.JPG (http://i4memory.com/reviewimages/videocards/inno3d/8800GT_OC/)

http://i4memory.com/reviewimages/videocards/inno3d/8800GT_OC/photos/Inno3d_8800GT_10.JPG (http://i4memory.com/reviewimages/videocards/inno3d/8800GT_OC/photos/Inno3d_8800GT_10.html)


System:

Intel Core 2 Extreme QX9650 L739A644 Retail OEM
CPU Cooling: Thermaright Ultra 120 Extreme + 120x25mm Delta 75cfm fan + MX-2 TIM
Gigabyte X38-DQ6 F6B & F7D bios supplied Gigabyte
512MB 8800GT Inno3D OC Edition stock 650/1512/1900 with 169.02 WHQL drivers
2x1GB Crucial Ballistix Tracer PC2-8500 dual channel kit
Memory cooling: 120x25mm Thermaltake 81cfm fan
160GB Seagate 7200.7 NCQ SATA port 2
2x3GB Gigabyte I-RAM raid 0 purchased from Auspcmarket.com.au
Pioneer DVD-RW
620W Corsair HX620 PSU supplied by Corsair
WinXP Pro SP2 Nlite Fully Updated.


The 512MB 8800GT Inno3D OC Edition cards come factory clocked at 650/1500/1900 according to GPUZ. But Rivatuner 2.06 reports them as 648/1512/1900.

Idle and load temps range from 41-49C idle to 59-62C load in an open desktop bench system.

http://fileshosts.com/intel/Gigabyte/x38_dq6_results/QX9650/ultra120/crucial/8500t_nk/8x/2.66c/400-533_4448_536-35-5_trd8-1_2T_1.275-0.5v_Nv_0.15_0.30_turbo_900mv_100psmch/8800GT_45/rivatuner_gpuz.png

I clocked my QX9650 Yorkfield to QX9770 Yorkfield quad core speeds @3200Mhz - 8x400FSB with 3:4 memory divider for 533Mhz 4-4-4-8 2T memory timings.

I only oc'd the GPU core leaving memory currently @1900Mhz

3Dmark06

@ stock 650/1512/1900 = 13,875 (http://fileshosts.com/intel/Gigabyte/x38_dq6_results/QX9650/ultra120/crucial/8500t_nk/8x/2.66c/400-533_4448_536-35-5_trd8-1_2T_1.275-0.5v_Nv_0.15_0.30_turbo_900mv_100psmch/8800GT_45/3dmark06_650_1512_950_13875.png)
@702/1620/1900 = 14,410 (http://fileshosts.com/intel/Gigabyte/x38_dq6_results/QX9650/ultra120/crucial/8500t_nk/8x/2.66c/400-533_4448_536-35-5_trd8-1_2T_1.275-0.5v_Nv_0.15_0.30_turbo_900mv_100psmch/8800GT_45/3dmark06_702_1620_950_14410.png)
@725/1674/1900 = 14,668 (http://fileshosts.com/intel/Gigabyte/x38_dq6_results/QX9650/ultra120/crucial/8500t_nk/8x/2.66c/400-533_4448_536-35-5_trd8-1_2T_1.275-0.5v_Nv_0.15_0.30_turbo_900mv_100psmch/8800GT_45/3dmark06_725_1674_950_14668.png)
@738/1728/1900 = 14,780 (http://fileshosts.com/intel/Gigabyte/x38_dq6_results/QX9650/ultra120/crucial/8500t_nk/8x/2.66c/400-533_4448_536-35-5_trd8-1_2T_1.275-0.5v_Nv_0.15_0.30_turbo_900mv_100psmch/8800GT_45/3dmark06_738_1728_950_14780.png)

3Dmark06 = 14,780
http://service.futuremark.com/compare?3dm06=3964423

http://fileshosts.com/intel/Gigabyte/x38_dq6_results/QX9650/ultra120/crucial/8500t_nk/8x/2.66c/400-533_4448_536-35-5_trd8-1_2T_1.275-0.5v_Nv_0.15_0.30_turbo_900mv_100psmch/8800GT_45/3dmark06_738_1728_950_14780.png

Haven't tried GPU core clock higher than 738Mhz for now. I wanted to run some Pcmark05 to see how single 512MB 8800GT pairs with 6GB Gigabyte I-RAM Raid 0 :)

Pcmark05 = 14,975
http://service.futuremark.com/compare?pcm05=1239691

Pcmark05

@ stock 650/1512/1900 = 14,699 (http://fileshosts.com/intel/Gigabyte/x38_dq6_results/QX9650/ultra120/crucial/8500t_nk/8x/2.66c/400-533_4448_536-35-5_trd8-1_2T_1.275-0.5v_Nv_0.15_0.30_turbo_900mv_100psmch/pcmark05_8800gt_stock_14699_iram.png)
@ 738/1728/1900 = 14,975 (http://fileshosts.com/intel/Gigabyte/x38_dq6_results/QX9650/ultra120/crucial/8500t_nk/8x/2.66c/400-533_4448_536-35-5_trd8-1_2T_1.275-0.5v_Nv_0.15_0.30_turbo_900mv_100psmch/pcmark05_8800gt_738-1728-950_14975_iram.png)

http://fileshosts.com/intel/Gigabyte/x38_dq6_results/QX9650/ultra120/crucial/8500t_nk/8x/2.66c/400-533_4448_536-35-5_trd8-1_2T_1.275-0.5v_Nv_0.15_0.30_turbo_900mv_100psmch/pcmark05_8800gt_738-1728-950_14975_iram.png

Then just bumped multiplier from 8x to 10x

3dmark06 @738/1728/1900 = 15,501
http://service.futuremark.com/compare?3dm06=3964806

http://fileshosts.com/intel/Gigabyte/x38_dq6_results/QX9650/ultra120/crucial/8500t_nk/10x/2.66c/400-533_4448_536-35-5_trd8-1_2T_1.5-0.5v_Nv_0.15_0.30_turbo_1v_100psmch/8800GT_45/3dmark06_738_1728_950_15501.png

PCmark05 = 17,021
http://service.futuremark.com/compare?pcm05=1239759

http://fileshosts.com/intel/Gigabyte/x38_dq6_results/QX9650/ultra120/crucial/8500t_nk/10x/2.66c/400-533_4448_536-35-5_trd8-1_2T_1.5-0.5v_Nv_0.15_0.30_turbo_1v_100psmch/pcmark05_8800gt_738-1728-950_17021.png

[oscar3d]

Because of the pictures you've just posted I'm hating you:ROTF:

I'm having spasms of envy....:shocked: those superclocked GT's look gorgeous!!

So 1.25V freaking AWESOME!! Thanks for the numbers, gonna try them later, and see if I can push for lower volts...

I see you just turned your QX9650 into a QX9770 right on the spot :up:

Are you planning this as yourfinal 24/7?

[eva2000]

Yeah these 8800GT are very nice :)

24/7 i prefer 3600-3800Mhz heh - 8x450FSB or 8x475FSB if possible

Putting it altogether GPU/Shader/Memory clocks for 512MB Inno3D 8800GT OC Edition I managed to easily bench at 742/1836/2052 with exception for 3dmark2003 I ran with lower shader clock of 1783mhz.

Managed to easily break 16k barrier for single 512MB Inno3D 8800GT OC in 3dmark06 and pulls off very decent runs for 3dmark05/2003 and just under 75k mark for 3dmark2001 :D


3dmark06 = 16,088 (http://service.futuremark.com/compare?3dm06=3975150)
3dmark05 = 24,427 (http://service.futuremark.com/compare?3dm05=3735597)
3dmark2003 = 45,860 (http://service.futuremark.com/compare?2k3=5626705)
3dmark2001 = 74,961 (http://service.futuremark.com/compare?2k1=9295769) (LOD = 4), 72,188 (http://fileshosts.com/intel/Gigabyte/x38_dq6_results/QX9650/ultra120/crucial/8500t_nk/10x/2.66c/400-533_4448_558-48-5_trd6-1_2T_1.5-0.5v_Nv_0.15_0.30_turbo_900mv_100psmch/8800GT_45/3dmark2001_742-1836-1026_72188.png) (no LOD)
AM3 = 245,219


http://fileshosts.com/intel/Gigabyte/x38_dq6_results/QX9650/ultra120/crucial/8500t_nk/10x/2.66c/400-533_4448_558-48-5_trd6-1_2T_1.5-0.5v_Nv_0.15_0.30_turbo_900mv_100psmch/8800GT_45/3dmark06_742-1836-1026_16088_tn.png (http://fileshosts.com/intel/Gigabyte/x38_dq6_results/QX9650/ultra120/crucial/8500t_nk/10x/2.66c/400-533_4448_558-48-5_trd6-1_2T_1.5-0.5v_Nv_0.15_0.30_turbo_900mv_100psmch/8800GT_45/3dmark06_742-1836-1026_16088.png)

http://fileshosts.com/intel/Gigabyte/x38_dq6_results/QX9650/ultra120/crucial/8500t_nk/10x/2.66c/400-533_4448_558-48-5_trd6-1_2T_1.5-0.5v_Nv_0.15_0.30_turbo_900mv_100psmch/8800GT_45/3dmark05_742-1836-1026_24427.png

http://fileshosts.com/intel/Gigabyte/x38_dq6_results/QX9650/ultra120/crucial/8500t_nk/10x/2.66c/400-533_4448_558-48-5_trd6-1_2T_1.5-0.5v_Nv_0.15_0.30_turbo_900mv_100psmch/8800GT_45/3dmark2003_742-1783_1026_45860_tn.png (http://fileshosts.com/intel/Gigabyte/x38_dq6_results/QX9650/ultra120/crucial/8500t_nk/10x/2.66c/400-533_4448_558-48-5_trd6-1_2T_1.5-0.5v_Nv_0.15_0.30_turbo_900mv_100psmch/8800GT_45/3dmark2003_742-1783_1026_45860.png)

http://fileshosts.com/intel/Gigabyte/x38_dq6_results/QX9650/ultra120/crucial/8500t_nk/10x/2.66c/400-533_4448_558-48-5_trd6-1_2T_1.5-0.5v_Nv_0.15_0.30_turbo_900mv_100psmch/8800GT_45/3dmark2001_742-1836-1026_74961_l4.png

http://fileshosts.com/intel/Gigabyte/x38_dq6_results/QX9650/ultra120/crucial/8500t_nk/10x/2.66c/400-533_4448_558-48-5_trd6-1_2T_1.5-0.5v_Nv_0.15_0.30_turbo_900mv_100psmch/8800GT_45/am3_742-1836-1026_245219_tn.png (http://fileshosts.com/intel/Gigabyte/x38_dq6_results/QX9650/ultra120/crucial/8500t_nk/10x/2.66c/400-533_4448_558-48-5_trd6-1_2T_1.5-0.5v_Nv_0.15_0.30_turbo_900mv_100psmch/8800GT_45/am3_742-1836-1026_245219.png)

[eva2000]

System:

Intel Core 2 Extreme QX9650 L739A644 Retail OEM
CPU cooling = Dtek Fuzion Rad Tower Box (http://i4memory.com/showthread.php?t=5133)
NB chipset cooling = Radiical Chipset Block/Corsair Cool single 120mm fan Rad/MCP350
Asus Blitz Extreme 0904 bios (http://i4memory.com/showthread.php?t=4294)
128MB Gainward FX5200 PCI
2x1GB OCZ PC3-14400 Platinum (http://i4memory.com/reviewimages/memory/OCZ/DDR3/platinum/14400/photos/) - DDR3-1800 rated at 8-8-8-27 at 1.9v
500GB Seagate 7200.10 SATA on SATA1 Port
LiteOn 165H DVD Burner
Sony FDD
1KW OCZ ProXStream
WinXP Pro SP2


Moved QX9650 back to Blitz Extreme with Dtek Fuzion and now core 0/1 temps no longer move even under load LOL

idle

http://fileshosts.com/intel/Asus/BlitzExtreme/dtekfuzion/QX9650_L739A644/ocz/platinum/14400/9x/5_6div/333-800-88827_A60AAA_2t_1.2-1.3-1.55-1.8-1.125-A_sronswAUTO_tbauto/cpuz_idle.png

load

http://fileshosts.com/intel/Asus/BlitzExtreme/dtekfuzion/QX9650_L739A644/ocz/platinum/14400/9x/5_6div/333-800-88827_A60AAA_2t_1.2-1.3-1.55-1.8-1.125-A_sronswAUTO_tbauto/prime95_load.png

similar core 0/1 vs core 2/3 temp differences on X38-DQ6 http://i4memory.com/showpost.php?p=80956&postcount=27 but with lower temps on Dtek Fuzion vs Thermalright Ultra 120 Extreme air

Immediately after ending Prime95.. temps

http://fileshosts.com/intel/Asus/BlitzExtreme/dtekfuzion/QX9650_L739A644/ocz/platinum/14400/9x/5_6div/333-800-88827_A60AAA_2t_1.2-1.3-1.55-1.8-1.125-A_sronswAUTO_tbauto/prime95_postload_idle_1.png

With Dtek Fuzion and Asus Blitz Extreme I can definitely clock my QX9650 L739A644 higher than before. Max on Gigabyte X38-DQ6 on Thermalright Ultra 120 Extreme was 4176Mhz at 1.60v idle/1.568v load for Super Pi 32M. On same air cooling with Asus Blitz Formula was around 4234Mhz at 1.560v.

On Asus Blitz Extreme so far at 4200Mhz at 1.552v idle / 1.544v load :)

Comparing Super Pi 32M and Everest numbers

Asus Blitz Extreme - broke 11min barrier easily

http://fileshosts.com/intel/Asus/BlitzExtreme/dtekfuzion/QX9650_L739A644/ocz/platinum/14400/10x/1_2div/266strap/420-840-76518_548995_1t_1.575-1.4-1.71-2.04-1.2-1.5_sronswoff_tbauto_x635x67_30mv/spi32m_10m58s844ms.png

http://fileshosts.com/intel/Asus/BlitzExtreme/dtekfuzion/QX9650_L739A644/ocz/platinum/14400/10x/1_2div/266strap/420-840-76518_548995_1t_1.575-1.4-1.71-2.04-1.2-1.5_sronswoff_tbauto_x635x67_30mv/everest.png

Gigabyte X38-DQ6

http://fileshosts.com/intel/Gigabyte/x38_dq6_results/QX9650/ultra120/supertalent/8000/9x/2.5a/464-580_5449_446-30-5_trd8-1_2T_1.65-0.8v_Nv_0.25_0.35_turbo/spi32m_11m03s937ms.png

http://fileshosts.com/intel/Gigabyte/x38_dq6_results/QX9650/ultra120/supertalent/8000/9x/2.5a/464-580_5449_446-30-5_trd8-1_2T_1.65-0.8v_Nv_0.25_0.35_turbo/everest.png

[eva2000]

Finally some decent numbers cpu clock wise... still about 250-400mhz behind other QX9650 cpus I've seen in terms of clock speed though :(

Wprime 32M @4400Mhz

http://fileshosts.com/intel/Asus/BlitzExtreme/dtekfuzion/QX9650_L739A644/ocz/platinum/14400/10x/1_2div/266strap/440-880-76518_54810105_1t_1.7125-1.4-1.77-2.12-1.225-1.5_sronswoff_tbauto_x635x67_30mv/wprime155_32m_9s735ms.png

Super Pi 1M & 32M @4330Mhz

http://fileshosts.com/intel/Asus/BlitzExtreme/dtekfuzion/QX9650_L739A644/ocz/platinum/14400/10x/1_2div/266strap/433-866-76518_54810105_1t_1.6875-1.4-1.75-2.1-1.225-1.5_sronswoff_tbauto_x635x67_30mv/spi1m_10s625ms.png

http://fileshosts.com/intel/Asus/BlitzExtreme/dtekfuzion/QX9650_L739A644/ocz/platinum/14400/10x/1_2div/266strap/433-866-76518_54810105_1t_1.6875-1.4-1.75-2.1-1.225-1.5_sronswoff_tbauto_x635x67_30mv/spi32m_10m40s578ms.png

512MB Inno3D OC Edition stock @742/1836/2000
3dmark06 = 16,033

http://fileshosts.com/intel/Asus/BlitzExtreme/dtekfuzion/QX9650_L739A644/ocz/platinum/14400/10x/1_2div/266strap/430-860-76518_54810105_1t_1.7125-1.4-1.77-2.12-1.225-1.5_sronswoff_tbauto_x635x67_30mv/8800GT_45/3dmark06_742-1836-1000_16033.png

Interesting that my run on Blitz Extreme scored lower in SM2/SM3 scores than my run on X38-DQ6 with cpu at nearly 200mhz lower cpu clock. Could be the higher FSB on X38-DQ6 @9x456FSB and/or the higher memory clock on video card at 2052mhz vs 2000mhz

http://fileshosts.com/intel/Gigabyte/x38_dq6_results/QX9650/ultra120/crucial/8500t_nk/9x/2.5a/456-570_4448_558-56-5_trd9-1_2T_1.55-0.7v_Nv_0.2_0.35_turbo_1v_100psmch/8800GT_45/3dmark06_742-1836-1026_16222.png

http://fileshosts.com/intel/Asus/BlitzExtreme/dtekfuzion/QX9650_L739A644/ocz/platinum/14400/10x/1_2div/266strap/430-860-76518_54810105_1t_1.7125-1.4-1.77-2.12-1.225-1.5_sronswoff_tbauto_x635x67_30mv/8800GT_45/16222vs16033_tn.png

[Aivas47a]

Thanks for taking the time to post all the thorough data eva, you're a mensch!

[Kampfzerstorer]

Awesome data spread!

Honestly I think that is about average for the qx9650.

I can only get mine to 4.1 on a P5e3 deluxe with 1.425 (set in BIOS) ((liquid cooling)) before I have to start giving it too much vcore. I start to get nervous around 1.5v, you're brave to try 1.6v+

[eva2000]

Thanks guys for the feedback.. yeah not sure how high we should go for vcore for these chips... someone who is friends with Intel folks, should ask them hehe

[simonmaltby]

My Qx9650 retail is working well but i'm trying to work out why Prime is so hard to get stable. Not that i rate running long 100% cpu intensive tests ( 10 minues is normally enough for me to feel happy).

Mine is L739A640

My chip does a super 10x400 (4Ghz) at 1.33 bios or 1.31 reported in windows. this is nice and steady and seems prime stable (2 hours before i gave up)

I can also get some very good SuperPi scores by booting to windows at 11x400 (4.4Ghz) and then scaling up to 425FSB using SetFSB. This is done with 1.525v Bios 1.49 in windows. This will run superPi without issues, but most other things crash the sys so it must be limited by the CPU or Mobo.

http://www.motormice.com/overclocking/superpi9-891.jpg

I can also run all the 3dmark tests at 4.5Ghz with 1.5vcore Bios 1.475 Windows without issue.

But i cant Prime at anthing higher than 4.1 atm.

By all accounts looking at what i have achieved it seems my chip is a good one. Because of this i'm leaning towards the something other than the CPU stopping Prime. If i can bench at 4.5 and super pi at 4.66 i would expect to be able to prime at 4.2 - 4.3?

Any comments or suggestions please?

[eva2000]

Nice even earlier than my L739A644 batch!

maybe prime needs alot more vcore for these chips ???

[simonmaltby]

maybe prime needs alot more vcore for these chips ???

Could do, but i notice that load temps sky rocket as volts increase. Maybe my cooling is just not cutting it... should be though as normal temps are very good its just those full load peaks. Lovley and cool under normal conditions even with high volts.

[eva2000]

Yeah temps sky rocket with voltages on QX9650.. it's normal :)

[oscar3d]

Totally %100 agree with you. This chip's temps are way so sensitive to VCORE changes...

[simonmaltby]

Well i seem to have found some more performance.

I have managed to...
Prime for 8hrs small FFT at 4.3 (1.45 vcore)
Run SuperPi 1M at 4.7 (1.525 vcore

This is all with fairly basic water cooling doing cpu, 2xgpu's and the chipset.

Looks like my chip is a very good one. It was the motherboard holding me back. More Nbridge volts required and less everything else.

[eva2000]

Well i seem to have found some more performance.

I have managed to...
Prime for 8hrs small FFT at 4.3 (1.45 vcore)
Run SuperPi 1M at 4.7 (1.525 vcore

This is all with fairly basic water cooling doing cpu, 2xgpu's and the chipset.

Looks like my chip is a very good one. It was the motherboard holding me back. More Nbridge volts required and less everything else.
Congrats man.. if only mine could do the same hehe

[safan80]

I just got a 39A as well. I won't be testing till later.

[eva2000]

I just got a 39A as well. I won't be testing till later.
Good luck :)

Made some interesting findings when I ran Super Pi 32M to the max clock speed I could with my QX9650 L739A644 on water cooling on Asus Blitz Extreme 0904 bios.

Findings:


As we all know disabling cores allows cpu to scale a bit higher due to reduced heat etc. Seems my QX9650 scaled alot better with 2 cores disabled. 4 core max = 4330Mhz, 2 core max = 4454Mhz and 1 core well no real sustantial stable gain for 32M over 2 core max.
What's interesting is that when 4 cores are enabled my coretemps show core 0/1 fixed at 38C after Dtek Fuzion block was used and under load only core 2/3 moved to higher temps substantially.
Now when I disabled 2 cores, coretemp lost all readings even for remaining 2 cores, but everest showed cpu temp as the higher temps - so probably reflective of core 2/3 being the main cores used by Windows XP. If this is true then core 2 or thread 3 in wprime would be the main core that does all the work on most occassions right ??
So thread 3 slowness in wprime maybe due to other background processes attached to core 2 (core 0, 1, 2, 3) ?
Could be related to how the motherboard bios is arranging the cores ?



4 core max

http://fileshosts.com/intel/Asus/BlitzExtreme/dtekfuzion/QX9650_L739A644/ocz/platinum/14400/10x/1_2div/266strap/433-866-76518_54810105_1t_1.6875-1.4-1.75-2.1-1.225-1.5_sronswoff_tbauto_x635x67_30mv/spi32m_10m40s578ms.png


2 core max

http://fileshosts.com/intel/Asus/BlitzExtreme/dtekfuzion/QX9650_L739A644/ocz/platinum/14400/10x/1_2div/266strap/445-890-76515_548995_1t_1.7-1.4-1.79-2.18-1.225-1.5_sronswoff_tbauto_x635x67_30mv/spi32m_10m15s140ms.png


Max CPUZ Validation @4605Mhz

http://fileshosts.com/intel/Asus/BlitzExtreme/dtekfuzion/QX9650_L739A644/ocz/platinum/14400/10x/1_2div/266strap/460-920-76515_548995_1t_1.7-1.4-1.79-2.18-1.225-1.5_sronswoff_tbauto_x635x67_30mv/cpuz_valid_4605mhz.png


Max Super Pi 1M @4534Mhz
Did do 4567Mhz for 10.078s but system rebooted

http://fileshosts.com/intel/Asus/BlitzExtreme/dtekfuzion/QX9650_L739A644/ocz/platinum/14400/10x/1_2div/266strap/453-906-76515_548995_1t_1.7-1.4-1.79-2.18-1.225-1.5_sronswoff_tbauto_x635x67_30mv/spi1m_10s156ms.png

[Triggerhappynz]

Just got my qx9650 L739A637 been running prime for over an hour at 416 x 10 @ 1.38v how long are you guys running for before you are happy?

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v736/brettkw/13841ghz.jpg

[safan80]

mine is a later batch...

here's 4.4Ghz
http://www.xtremesystems.org/forums/showpost.php?p=2611674&postcount=4133

[Aivas47a]

Nice. I'm stuck at "only" 4.25ghz (10x425) at 1.45 vcore (actual). L739A

[Kampfzerstorer]

You guys are makin me jealous... lol

Any secrets to makin this thing clock higher?

[safan80]

You guys are makin me jealous... lol

Any secrets to makin this thing clock higher?

yes... voltage ;)

[safan80]

http://www.motormice.com/overclocking/superpi9-891.jpg

I can also run all the 3dmark tests at 4.5Ghz with 1.5vcore Bios 1.475 Windows without issue.

But i cant Prime at anthing higher than 4.1 atm.

By all accounts looking at what i have achieved it seems my chip is a good one. Because of this i'm leaning towards the something other than the CPU stopping Prime. If i can bench at 4.5 and super pi at 4.66 i would expect to be able to prime at 4.2 - 4.3?

Any comments or suggestions please?

run occt 1.2 beta prime can be stable on the Maximus Formula but the system will still be unstable. the only way to know for sure it to run occt. I can be prime stable with this boardand it means nothing to me.

[oscar3d]

Omg!!

[fadetoblack]

Just got my qx9650 L739A637 been running prime for over an hour at 416 x 10 @ 1.38v how long are you guys running for before you are happy?

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v736/brettkw/13841ghz.jpg

what kind of cooling do you have? i ran prime overnight on my qx9650 at 400x10 at 1.3875, it was stable for 6.5 hours BUT when i woke up i looked at the temps and they had reached 77. i looked through the core temp logs and it even hit 80 at certain points so i stopped there right. hopefully i can get it stable at a lower vcore, wasnt successful at 1.36 (prime gave an error after about 1.5 hours)

[oscar3d]

For what you've shown Fade to Black, and based it my experience this is as far as you can take it with the lower VCORE.

I'm with an Asus P5E3 Delux and I'm running mine @ 1.35 10x400. LowerVCORES and it will crash...

Those temps are what most of people are getting on air... Tuniq Tower or TRUE

I'm getting 70-71C with my TRUE... which Coretemp are you using, the latest?

Well 6.5 hours priming... not bad... not bad at all....

[eva2000]

Yeah i was getting around 67-70C on thermalright ultra 120 extreme @4000mhz but at 1.440v room temp around 28+ C

http://fileshosts.com/intel/Gigabyte/x38_dq6_results/QX9650/ultra120/corsair/10000c5d/12x/3.2b/333-533_55518_446-42-48A_2T_1.5-0.45v_Nv_0.15_0.15_std/prime95_load1.png

[fadetoblack]

For what you've shown Fade to Black, and based it my experience this is as far as you can take it with the lower VCORE.

I'm with an Asus P5E3 Delux and I'm running mine @ 1.35 10x400. LowerVCORES and it will crash...

Those temps are what most of people are getting on air... Tuniq Tower or TRUE

I'm getting 70-71C with my TRUE... which Coretemp are you using, the latest?

Well 6.5 hours priming... not bad... not bad at all....

im using core temp beta 0.95.4. so you're saying i should keep it at this vcore with those kind of temps or try lowering it a little? btw i swapped out the tuniq and put in a TRUE and temps are a little lower, but for some reason the diff between core 0 and 3 is 10-12 degrees now. so im seeing about 55 on core 3 and 67 on core 0 sometimes.

[joe.denice]

yeah these chips after 1.375 volts seem to get rather toasty, i will try and shoot for 4.2ghz tonight and see how well it goes.

[fadetoblack]

btw, how do you guys have your TRUE's installed? horizontally or vertically? also, what side did you install the fan on, and is it pushing air through the TRUE (out through the back of the case) or pulling ?

[eva2000]

pushing air through mine with delta 75cfm 120x25mm fan

http://i4memory.com/reviewimages/cooling/cpu/Thermalright/ultra120extreme/installed/photos/thermalright_120ultra_extreme_02.JPG (http://i4memory.com/reviewimages/cooling/cpu/Thermalright/ultra120extreme/installed/photos/thermalright_120ultra_extreme_02.html)

one thing i learnt from scythe infinity experience is push the fan further down the heatsink so it cools the cpu socket area as well :)

[xgman]

Yeah i was getting around 67-70C on thermalright ultra 120 extreme @4000mhz but at 1.440v room temp around 28+ C

http://fileshosts.com/intel/Gigabyte/x38_dq6_results/QX9650/ultra120/corsair/10000c5d/12x/3.2b/333-533_55518_446-42-48A_2T_1.5-0.45v_Nv_0.15_0.15_std/prime95_load1.png

How is it that your 4 temps are so close and everyone elses I have seen are in sets between 5 and 12 degrees difference between cores?

[joe.denice]

yeah i am suprised as well as my temps for the first 2 cores tend to run about 3 to 4c higher then the other 2 cores.

[fadetoblack]

Coretemp 0.95.4 isn't correct Coretemp 0.95.6 beta i just started to test shows closer load/idle temps to everest OSD report in screenshots heh

Coretemp 0.95.4 is about 5C under reported from Coretemp 0.95.6 beta.



where did you get 0.95.6? all i see is 95.4 on the core temp site

[eva2000]

How is it that your 4 temps are so close and everyone elses I have seen are in sets between 5 and 12 degrees difference between cores?depends on board and cooling i guess.. on Blitz extreme when i changed over to dtek fuzion cooling now under load core 0/1 don't move from 38C and only core 2/3 go a tad higher LOL

http://fileshosts.com/intel/Asus/BlitzExtreme/dtekfuzion/QX9650_L739A644/ocz/platinum/14400/9x/5_6div/333-800-88827_A60AAA_2t_1.2-1.3-1.55-1.8-1.125-A_sronswAUTO_tbauto/prime95_load.png

http://fileshosts.com/intel/Asus/BlitzExtreme/dtekfuzion/QX9650_L739A644/ocz/platinum/14400/9x/1_2div/333strap/466-933-77718_54812105_1t_1.575-1.5-1.81-2.24-1.225-1.6_srswoff_tblvl0_x635x67_30mv/spi32m_10m49s812ms.png


where did you get 0.95.6? all i see is 95.4 on the core temp site

Internal beta.. wait to next official release from author or email him for a copy of it :)

[oscar3d]

im using core temp beta 0.95.4. so you're saying i should keep it at this vcore with those kind of temps or try lowering it a little? btw i swapped out the tuniq and put in a TRUE and temps are a little lower, but for some reason the diff between core 0 and 3 is 10-12 degrees now. so im seeing about 55 on core 3 and 67 on core 0 sometimes.

That means my friend, that the temps you had with the Tuniq were even worse. Coretemp 0.95.6 is the real deal on temps, so to the temps you had before with the tuniq, add +5C to the temps you posted.

I'm goig on vacation, but when I come back I'm going to try the pull/push configuration o my TRUE. It is installed verically, my TRUE is also lapped and I've added a washer to make it really really tight to the mobo. (the so called "coin/washer mod")

Stay with that TRUE fade, I think Tuniq is not going to help you betterwith this chip. ATM the TRUE is the best option to run stuff on air.