GTL Ref Tweaking Guide [Archive] - XtremeSystems Forums

saaya

10-14-2008, 05:57 AM

Hey guys,

Been playing with Blackops and GTL Ref settings today and studdied the docs from Intel a bit. Its 10pm and i need to get some sleep, some quick points.

Core0 and Core2 are in the same chip? can anybody confirm?
Core1 and Core3 are in the same chip? can anybody confirm?
i meassured CPU GTL Ref volts, and the table i posted earlier is a bit off
1 step is pretty much exactly 7mv
the BIOS maps VTT incorrectly! default vtt for 45nm cpus is 1.10v, which is applied by default, but its displayed as 1.20v. so when you use a 45nm cpu and set vtt to 1.30v its actually only 1.20v. That makes some fsb overclocks ive seen here even more amazing since they were actually with .10v vtt less! :D
this will be fixed in G33 thatll come out soon :D
Core1 GTL Ref is higher than the rest of the Cores by default, and is linked to NB Gtl!
Core0 2 and 3 was 720mv GTL Ref by default for me (which is 1.100v vtt x 0.655 instead of the official spec of x 0.635, its only slightly off tho, and it varies by board and cpu, so nothing special)
Core 1 has 760mv GTL Ref by default
Core1 always has 6 steps higher default GTL Ref, so when you set
+10+10+10+10
its actually
+10+16+10+10
this is per intel spec! so it should be like this on all boards...
default per intel spec is
Core0 0.635 x VTT
Core1 0.700 x VTT
Core2 0.635 x VTT
Core3 0.635 x VTT
every board will have slightly different GLT Ref settings, with the same cpu, some boards will have a default GTL Ref +/- 30mv which is around 4 steps.
GTL Ref of Core0 2 and 3 should always be within +/- 5mv though since they are related according to intel spec

I made a little guide to show where to meassure GTL Ref voltages and how to calculate GTL Ref voltages easily for a given VTT :toast:

http://depositfiles.com/files/8755756
(kostenlos download -> download)

http://www.abload.de/thumb/1r6l.png (http://www.abload.de/image.php?img=1r6l.png) http://www.abload.de/thumb/2ztb.png (http://www.abload.de/image.php?img=2ztb.png)

Here are some good guides explaining GTL Ref:
BlazingPC (http://www.blazingpc.com/forum/showthread.php/gtl_voltages_explained-14556/index.html?t=14556)
EdgeOfStability (http://www.edgeofstability.com/articles/dfi_p35/gtl/gtl1.html)

negev

10-14-2008, 06:03 AM

Ok im confused.

How do you know what GTL voltage you want in the first place? Other peoples settings? Black Magic/Voodoo?

Also, your spreadsheet says "enter current VTT setting or measured VTT in highlighted field" but you said that the vtt settings is +0.10v higher than the real vtt, so won't this affect the calculation?

Ryan12

10-14-2008, 02:24 PM

negev

10-14-2008, 02:33 PM

Well the attachment documents measuring points for reading the voltage with a multimeter, although I'm not sure what kind of heatsink you could use to actually take the measurement, as the points are right next to the cpu socket..

saaya

10-14-2008, 07:36 PM

Ok im confused.

How do you know what GTL voltage you want in the first place? Other peoples settings? Black Magic/Voodoo?

Thats my exact question as well... I assume we just need trial and error and see which works best like any other voltage i guess?yes, every cpu looks a slightly different GTL ref for each core, and every board varies slightly, so its a trial and error thing. but you can learn a lot from looking at other peoples results since all 45nm dualcore cpus are about the same, all 45nm quads are about the same etc :)

ill see if i can collect some settings from people to give you guys some more guidance.

but its called fine-tuning, if there would be a way to know what setting is best for your cpu, then the bios would configure this automatically and there wouldnt be a need to fine tune :D
btw, i dont think any other board allows this fine steps actually of only 0.007v :D
i remember my p5e3 had 4 options for cpu GTL, and it was applied for all 4 cores :D

Also, your spreadsheet says "enter current VTT setting or measured VTT in highlighted field" but you said that the vtt settings is +0.10v higher than the real vtt, so won't this affect the calculation?
sure, you gotta keep in mind that real vtt is lower than what it says in bios.
so if you set 1.2v in bios, enter 1.1 in the spreadsheet to see which GTL Ref ratio results in what GTL Ref voltage.

Basically this lets you guys adjust the FSB signal window.
you can increase the amplitude by increasing vtt, and you can adjust the center of the wave signal to compensate for the signal rising or falling too fast, at least thats how i understood GTL Ref so far :D

Well the attachment documents measuring points for reading the voltage with a multimeter, although I'm not sure what kind of heatsink you could use to actually take the measurement, as the points are right next to the cpu socket..
:D

http://www.abload.de/thumb/image209z3y.jpg (http://www.abload.de/image.php?img=image209z3y.jpg) http://www.abload.de/thumb/image211mac.jpg (http://www.abload.de/image.php?img=image211mac.jpg) http://www.abload.de/thumb/image210zvc.jpg (http://www.abload.de/image.php?img=image210zvc.jpg)

temps were actually quite ok as you can see :lol:

but yeah, joking aside, you need a slim heatsink like the TRUE or a waterblock. or you solder wires to it:
http://www.abload.de/thumb/image213wwl.jpg (http://www.abload.de/image.php?img=image213wwl.jpg)

actually measuring gtl ref all the time doesnt make that much sense, every step is 7mv, so all you need to check is what the default voltages with your cpu and your board are at stock speeds with stock vtt and with increased vtt, and from that you know all you need to know already. so you can put a small heatsink on there just to meassure the voltages with a DMM and then after your done taking your notes, put the big heatsink back on there :D

Ryan12

10-14-2008, 10:32 PM

Makes sense, thanks heaps saaya... Never seen good support support from a rep on forums before.. hopefully it will help me tune in me E8400 to some good clock speeds with lower voltages!

RAYTTK

10-15-2008, 12:50 PM

@ Negev love the black magic voodoo line pissed myself laughing,
@ saaya thanks for taking some time for this.
Sure there are a few tutorials about what GTLS do but Blackops relevent GTL refs are whats required

saaya

10-15-2008, 06:03 PM

Makes sense, thanks heaps saaya... Never seen good support support from a rep on forums before.. hopefully it will help me tune in me E8400 to some good clock speeds with lower voltages!
your welcome :toast:
ive personally seen litle gain from GTLref tweaking, but some people got very nice results with it and tweaked an extra 20mhz fsb on quads out of their boards :D

@ saaya thanks for taking some time for this.
Sure there are a few tutorials about what GTLS do but Blackops relevent GTL refs are whats requiredmhhh what do you mean?
GTL Ref is all the same on any board, we just have more options to fine tune it than other boards :)

heres a good guide, although a bit confusing:
http://www.edgeofstability.com/articles/dfi_p35/gtl/gtl1.html

Ryan12

10-15-2008, 07:19 PM

Where everywhere i read people just keep saying up the voltages blah blah blah... Where just playing around with aegis panel and prime95 for hours... It's totally the right mixture of voltages rather then just MORE volts... Theres someone on here that keeps correcting ppl to say its the right 'mixture' and now im getting somewhere with this board, but i must say its a good learning curve :)
Also - does the south bridge volts change alot, what does the volts actually reference to?

Xello

10-15-2008, 09:29 PM

Hey guys,

Been playing with Blackops and GTL Ref settings today and studdied the docs from Intel a bit. Its 10pm and i need to get some sleep, some quick points.

[LIST=1]
Core0 and Core2 are in the same chip? can anybody confirm?
Core1 and Core3 are in the same chip? can anybody confirm?

Sounds right, 0 and 1 are the first cores on each die.

the BIOS maps VTT incorrectly! default vtt for 45nm cpus is 1.10v, which is applied by default, but its displayed as 1.20v. so when you use a 45nm cpu and set vtt to 1.30v its actually only 1.20v. That makes some fsb overclocks ive seen here even more amazing since they were actually with .10v vtt less! :D

Always wondered about this, it agrees with Raja too who told me 1.35v vtt gives 1.27v real.

saaya

10-16-2008, 02:48 AM

Also - does the south bridge volts change alot, what does the volts actually reference to?its the main sb supply voltage... as i said before, ive never seen this influence anything but people pushing high fsbs said it helps, and people running raid said it helps them when ocing which makes sense... :D

Sounds right, 0 and 1 are the first cores on each die.
Always wondered about this, it agrees with Raja too who told me 1.35v vtt gives 1.27v real.
ok, thanks for confirming! :toast:
and yes, im a bit annoyed that vtt thing was fixed already :D

FYI, i meassured CPU GTL REF voltages with an 8600 and created a table with the ACTUAL GTL REF dividers:
http://www.xtremesystems.org/forums/showthread.php?t=201022

ill check with a quad tomorrow :)

RAYTTK

10-16-2008, 08:58 AM

mhhh what do you mean?
GTL Ref is all the same on any board, we just have more options to fine tune it than other boards
I mean some of the guides and forum threads ive read have been for ASUS 790i or have had more numbers in the equation, like the black ops stops at 0.740 but others go as high as 0.905 and TBH ive read that much its turned my brain to mush. I drive a chemical tanker truck for a living so going to work at 5am & tweaking this board till 12pm is making me sleep deprived lol. Im still hoping for a simple if you put VTT @ x volts you need to set GTL's to + whatever
What quadcore are you going to use?

negev

10-16-2008, 09:52 AM

Also very interested in quadcore results.

What's interesting in the graph that HDCHOPPER posted (in the other thread about the same subject) is that the margin for error in GTL refs drops very close to 0 as you approach 1800Mhz fsb, but seems to bounce back up again after it... this tends to suggest this it would be very difficult to tune GTL refs to 1800Mhz but easier at slightly higher speeds..

RAYTTK

10-16-2008, 12:31 PM

What's interesting in the graph that HDCHOPPER posted (in the other thread about the same subject) is that the margin for error in GTL refs drops very close to 0 as you approach 1800Mhz fsb, but seems to bounce back up again after it... this tends to suggest this it would be very difficult to tune GTL refs to 1800Mhz but easier at slightly higher speeds
I cant get past 450 FSB on this QX with an 8x multi, If I up to 9 its a no go but maybe I should try 10 x 400 FSB and set all the GTL;s to +16? what do you think?

negev

10-16-2008, 01:43 PM

I cant get past 450 FSB on this QX with an 8x multi, If I up to 9 its a no go but maybe I should try 10 x 400 FSB and set all the GTL;s to +16? what do you think?

I would say the Blackops SAS team will crash through your window and assassinate everyone in sight if you try this.

Seriously, I have no idea, I was just commenting on the graph. The curve seems to go up at 1800Mhz, but I doubt it goes up very high before coming back down even lower... perhaps slightly above 1800Mhz is a good spot. This is entirely theoretical - if you cook your cpu or accidentally create a new self-replicating army of warrior blackops replicators that spit poisonous venom and sing Queen songs I am not taking responsibility or running into any dangerous areas with a naquada bomb.

RAYTTK

10-16-2008, 01:51 PM

:ROTF::ROTF::ROTF: Tried It, It didnt like it :confused:
Reset OC Gear. Had enough now watching tropic thunder:up:

Sailindawg

10-16-2008, 04:02 PM

It's totally the right mixture of voltages rather then just MORE volts

I think that's a pretty succinct statement regarding GTL to stabilize an overclock. After reading forum posts and other articles, that's pretty much sums up how I have begun to look at using GTL tuning. It's a very time consuming and slower approach, but an approach that should yield stable clocks without over volting the cpu unnecessarily.

@Saaya

ill check with a quad tomorrow

Any chance you could run a 65 nm quad as well?

I cant get past 450 FSB on this QX with an 8x multi, If I up to 9 its a no go but maybe I should try 10 x 400 FSB and set all the GTL;s to +16?

I'm running a Q6600 and I'm currently priming away. I'm running at 9x380, using 1.3375 Vcpu (BIOS) and have my GTL's set at +14 for core 0&2 and +16 for cores 1&3. In my case running all cores at +13, while stable for 9x363, @ 380 core 3 would fail within 15 minutes. Setting core 3 to +14, would get one hour, +15 would make core 0 fail after 4 hours. I ended up setting core 0 & 3 both to +16 and I'm passing P95 for 3 hours so far.

The funny thing is that I can pass Intel Burn test 20 passes with GTL's all set to +14. I like to be P95 stable for at least 7 hours. I have never had a problem overclocking using that stability criteria.

The one question I have, is how high is too high for a GTL setting?

I understand that VTT should be much over 1.4V, but not so sure how high GTL's can go. I'm being stingy on the voltage purposefully to try to tune stability with GTL's.

saaya

10-16-2008, 08:49 PM

I mean some of the guides and forum threads ive read have been for ASUS 790i or have had more numbers in the equation, like the black ops stops at 0.740 but others go as high as 0.905 and TBH ive read that much its turned my brain to mush. I drive a chemical tanker truck for a living so going to work at 5am & tweaking this board till 12pm is making me sleep deprived lol. Im still hoping for a simple if you put VTT @ x volts you need to set GTL's to + whatever
What quadcore are you going to use?
ive seen those settings, and those 0.905 settings are actually the voltage, not the ratio afaik.
and sure, id like to shed some light on this as well to make gtl ref tweaking easier :)
just be patient and ill continue to udpate this thread with my findings :D

ill try as many cpus as i can get ahold of :)

Also very interested in quadcore results.

What's interesting in the graph that HDCHOPPER posted (in the other thread about the same subject) is that the margin for error in GTL refs drops very close to 0 as you approach 1800Mhz fsb, but seems to bounce back up again after it... this tends to suggest this it would be very difficult to tune GTL refs to 1800Mhz but easier at slightly higher speeds..interesting... can you link me?

I cant get past 450 FSB on this QX with an 8x multi, If I up to 9 its a no go but maybe I should try 10 x 400 FSB and set all the GTL;s to +16? what do you think?whats the highest fsb with 9x multi for you?

I understand that VTT should be much over 1.4V, but not so sure how high GTL's can go. I'm being stingy on the voltage purposefully to try to tune stability with GTL's.
VTT 1.55v wouldnt boot my 8600
VTT 1.50v works, but i havent had it there for a long time yet
Regarding GTLs, i have no idea... there is no MAX rating for GTL voltages and i havent heard of anbody killing their cpus with high GTL...

but come to think of it... some people actually killes their cpus with relatively low vtt... maybe they tweaked their gtls to high volts and THAT actually killed their cpus and not the VTT? :shrug:
ill play around some more and will see what i can find.

in any case, i think its unlikely that gtl will kill a cpu...
im sure its possible, but i havent heard of cpus scaling with higher and higher gtl volts. a few steps up or down is usually all you need, so theres no sense in going really high or low which might damage the cpu...

RAYTTK

10-17-2008, 09:40 AM

whats the highest fsb with 9x multi for you?

9 X 433 is the highest, Ram @ 1734mhz 7's pl7

negev

10-17-2008, 11:15 AM

interesting... can you link me?

http://www.thetechrepository.com/attachment.php?attachmentid=366&stc=1&d=1169078346

Praz

10-17-2008, 11:33 AM

http://www.thetechrepository.com/attachment.php?attachmentid=366&stc=1&d=1169078346
That graph is an example of how the margin can change as FSB changes. It's not a literal representation. Because of reflections, harmonics, jitter and countless other influences the error window at one FSB setting may be completely different at another setting.

Saaya

Really nice thing you're doing here for the users of this board. Definitely raises the bar of manufacturer support.

saaya

10-17-2008, 11:18 PM

9 X 433 is the highest, Ram @ 1734mhz 7's pl7but with 10x multi the max fsb is suddenly only 380?
then its def not the fsb holding you back but the cpu itself...
but how come you got it stable 600mhz higher on a more basic board with a weaker analog pwm? that doesnt make any sense at all... :confused:
are you sure your using the same vcore and all?
what vcore did you use on the gigabyte p35 and what vcore on blackops?
could it be that the gigabyte board overvolted vcore?
even then a 600mhz difference is very weird... :confused:

http://www.thetechrepository.com/attachment.php?attachmentid=366&stc=1&d=1169078346
ahhh yeah i saw that one on blazingpc... very interesting...

That graph is an example of how the margin can change as FSB changes. It's not a literal representation. Because of reflections, harmonics, jitter and countless other influences the error window at one FSB setting may be completely different at another setting.

Saaya

Really nice thing you're doing here for the users of this board. Definitely raises the bar of manufacturer support.
thanks, doing my best :toast:
yeah, a lot of things play into this, but there should be common trends, and im pretty sure the 450fsb thing is a common trend.
im really surprised how the tolrance level increases beyond 450fsb though... could it have to do with a higher PL setting at those high fsb speeds maybe?

RAYTTK

10-18-2008, 12:29 AM

but with 10x multi the max fsb is suddenly only 380?
then its def not the fsb holding you back but the cpu itself...
but how come you got it stable 600mhz higher on a more basic board with a weaker analog pwm? that doesnt make any sense at all...
are you sure your using the same vcore and all?
what vcore did you use on the gigabyte p35 and what vcore on blackops?
could it be that the gigabyte board overvolted vcore?
even then a 600mhz difference is very weird...

FSB is changing with the mem dimms ie, last night managed 9 x 440 on white dimms. The reason I tried the Gigabyte was to determine if it was the cpu holding me back, which is what i thought so I was very surprised to get 4.2 on it, Vcore 1.5v NB 1.63 which yes ive tried on blackops. I thought maybe it was a low ram 800mhz on P35 that helped so i have tried 800 mhz a stick in blackops but no luck . Look Im not saying the Gigabytes a better board you know It was red hot & totally insufficient for 24/7. I think this chip just isnt that good a clocker past the 3.7 mark. Im running 11 x 340 now with 4gb of ram just going to chill for a week or so play some games etc. Eagerly await your results for Quadcores, Meanwhile i keep checking ebay for a cheap E8500.
Again I thank you for continued effort in helping make sense of the GTL;s

saaya

10-18-2008, 12:38 AM

your welcome :toast:
hmmm well im still puzzled how you got a way higher cpu clock on that board than the blackops, which has a way beefer, faster clocked pwm... hmmm
if it would be fsb, ok, i could imagine that board has a better default setting for gtl settings or higher vtt by default etc, but higher cpu clocks is a thing that depends on the pwm, and maybe BIOS support... hmmm maybe thats it, BIOS support for 65nm hmmmm but im surprised if it would make a 600mhz difference... very weird... ill check with the BIOS engineers :)

negev

10-18-2008, 04:05 AM

any news on 45nm quad results yet saaya?

I'm trying to get to 3.5ghz, and I think GTL refs need adjusting, either that or my cpu just wont go that far

negev

10-18-2008, 07:21 AM

Hrmm, I think my chip just doesn't want to do 3.5ghz, either that or gtls need adjusting without core#1 being at a -5 offset.

vcore 1.41 (1.4 real)
vtt 1.35
PLL 1.58
SB 1.57
NB 1.67
NB step +3
CPU GTL 10,5,10,10

1:3 divider to take memory out of the equation.

At 438x8 (3.5ghz) I get a rounding or calc error in prime after about 2 mins every time.

I have tried:

vcore up to 1.43v
vtt 1.45
PL 1.62
NB step +4

All with no difference. if NB is less than 1.67 the machine bluescreens, but at 1.67 I get calc errors which makes me think that the NB is now stable but the cpu needs tweaking.

I have tried adjusting GTLs:

9,4,9,9
11,6,11,11
12,7,12,12
13,8,13,13
14,9,14,14
15,10,15,15

I think this is as far as I went, initially these changes made no difference but the last two caused the machine to hardlock almost instantly when running prime.

I am wondering if higher gtl settings are needed, but that I might need to also adjust something else to get it stable. In the past hardlocks have nearly always been related to vNB, i'm wondering if increases the cpu gtls like this means I also need to adjust NB GTL or lower vNB.

Failing that, what is a good methodology for adjusting individual GTLs? I'd rather have some kind of method than just random changes...

cadaveca

10-18-2008, 07:30 AM

do you really need 1.35 vtt negev?

RAYTTK

10-18-2008, 08:16 AM

what is a good methodology for adjusting individual GTLs? I'd rather have some kind of method than just random changes...
My point Exactly. Hopefully saaya will come through with some solid Quadcore results

negev

10-18-2008, 08:33 AM

@cadaveca

1.35 with this bios is only 1.25 real

@RAYTTK

fingers crossed! I'm actually curious to know if GTL refs only affect a specific core. I.e. if GTL0 is wrong, would that always cause errors in core #0 only or could it cause errors in the other cores as well? If the GTL for an individual core makes a difference only to that core then we could use affinity in task manager and fine-tune them one by one.

cadaveca

10-18-2008, 08:43 AM

GTL0 and 2 should be the same core, 1 and 3 the other.

And negev, I understand that, however I have been finding that with quite a few 45nm chips(about 40% of the 40 or so I've played with) that increase in VTT merely creates instability, with C0, C1 and E0 quads and duals. Alot of times I am finding that memory is the limiting factor, so with you with 1700mhz 2x2, I'd say drop the divider and try for more.

Not to say that the memory isn't capable of more, but I'm running @ 450FSB with 4x1gb(1800mhz), no VTT changes. NB volts definately much lower than what you are using...

But the other chips, the remaining 60%...seem to require MORE than what you are giving..as you say, it's only 1.25v...so I don't understand how you came to use that value...

GTL tweaking adjsuts the "window" in which the signal is read. As you adjust VTT, vcpu, and vNB you change this window...maybe you've made the window to big...don
t forget that GTL cna be tweaked DOWN as well...

negev

10-18-2008, 08:58 AM

GTL0 and 2 should be the same core, 1 and 3 the other.

But I have four cores... what about the other two?

And negev, I understand that, however I have been finding that with quite a few 45nm chips(about 40% of the 40 or so I've played with) that increase in VTT merely creates instability, with C0, C1 and E0 quads and duals. Alot of times I am finding that memory is the limiting factor, so with you with 1700mhz 2x2, I'd say drop the divider and try for more.

You missed this in my post: "1:3 divider to take memory out of the equation."

Not to say that the memory isn't capable of more, but I'm running @ 450FSB with 4x1gb(1800mhz), no VTT changes. NB volts definately much lower than what you are using...

Interesting, what board are you using? If it's the blackops can you post all your settings please?

But the other chips, the remaining 60%...seem to require MORE than what you are giving..as you say, it's only 1.25v...so I don't understand how you came to use that value...

Several other people used this for their setting, Xello got up to about 4ghz i think using 1.35 in bios (1.25 real).

GTL tweaking adjsuts the "window" in which the signal is read. As you adjust VTT, vcpu, and vNB you change this window...maybe you've made the window to big...dont forget that GTL cna be tweaked DOWN as well...

Yeah I tried one notch down on each ref.. maybe i should go down further

RyderOCZ

10-18-2008, 09:02 AM

But I have four cores... what about the other two?You are controlling all 4 cores (0,1,2,3) Core 0 and 2 are on the same die, Core 1 and 3 are on the other.. therefore you only have 2 GTL refs to change. 2 cores run on each GTL ref.

Hope that helps. :)

negev

10-18-2008, 09:11 AM

So GTL 0,1 is for Die1 which is also Core 0,1 and GTL 2,3 is for Die2 which is also Core 2,3

correct?

cadaveca

10-18-2008, 09:19 AM

Negev,

vcore 1.325
vtt 1.2
PLL 1.509
SB 1.50
NB 1.50

but this is with QX9650/Q9650, and maybe because q9450 has less cache, maybe FSB of cache is neutered on your chip.

10,5,10,10 cpu GTL has never worked for me. Sure, it can create a bootable situation, but never stability. But I always keep VTT low...

you should not need to tweak GTL or VTT, IMHO, until over 1.3625v cpu. each step above is going to require miniscule adjustments, and this can be offset by adjsuting other voltages to fall in line with cpu volts.

Also, more than 1.6v NB is going to cause issues. You should NOT need that much @ 425FSB...more like 1.4v...I can even run 450fsb dual, 4x1, @ 1.375v bios.

GTL 0 and 1 should be different dies in quad, AFAIK. when I say core, I mean piece of silicon, not cpu.

negev

10-18-2008, 09:24 AM

And thats on a blackops?

negev

10-18-2008, 09:28 AM

no way are those settings on a blackops, i can't even post at 435fsb using that (with all GTLS at 0).

and 425fsb i need 1.53v, 1.5v is unstable. for 438 i need 1.67

RAYTTK

10-18-2008, 09:28 AM

I'm actually curious to know if GTL refs only affect a specific core. I.e. if GTL0 is wrong, would that always cause errors in core #0 only or could it cause errors in the other cores as well?
I went down this road a few times myself, If core 1 failed prime i went into bios & changed the value up & tried again but it just turned into another waste of time.
I see we are getting some VIP members joining this thread maybe one of these xtreme Guru's will guide the blind.
Im now running 10 x 375 with no vtt increase & GTL's on default 2 hrs prime stable

cadaveca

10-18-2008, 09:28 AM

no way are those settings on a blackops, i can't even post at 435fsb using that (with all GTLS at 0).

and 425fsb i need 1.53v, 1.5v is unstable. for 438 i need 1.67

Yep, blackops. On air too, with fan blowing away from nb block.:shrug: Maybe you just got a bad cpu...becuase I do not feel I have a cherry board or nothing...but you'd have to ask Saaya about that one.

negev

10-18-2008, 09:32 AM

Well my settings at 425 aren't too dissimilar from xello's and he has a QX9650.

I'm pretty sure the voltages im running at the moment, my cpu needs in order to be stable.

I tried vtt at 1.2 (bios) - prime locked instantly
vtt at 1.5 (bios) - no difference, prime errors within 2mins

cadaveca

10-18-2008, 09:40 AM

OK, so you upped VTT lot, and is slightly more stable, which means that GTL tweaks must be the way for you. Adjusting VTT changes GTL window, but I think becuase you have NB volts so high, alot of GTL tweak is nessecary, and hard to do when you have both NB and cpu GTL to worry about.

Your chip IS NOT qx9650, and my QX9650 works with lower cpu volts than listed above, so pls don't make that comparison. Xello's QX9650 isn't an exceptional sample or anything, it's run of the mill.

Personally, I think you should try default VTT and play with GTLs...find your max stable @ default gtl, and then go a few MHZ above and adjust GTL to suit. I mean, if things were great for you, we wouldn't be having this conversation, so maybe a new approach is a good idea?

negev

10-18-2008, 10:02 AM

Changing VTT from 1.35 to 1.42 (in bios) made no difference whatsoever. Lowering it made the system lock almost instantly when running prime.

I don't think 425x8 on a q9450 is that bad, I just want to push it higher and it seems like GTL tweaks are whats needed.

Max stable at default GTL was about 400x8 I think, after that i have to change them and 10,5,10,10 is what a lot of people use and it works at this fsb.

Ryan12

10-18-2008, 02:50 PM

I know we are talking more so about quad cores here... But i did find on my E8400 that no matter what i set the NB at whilst trying to overclock it at around (9x450), that the NB only would like to be at 1.56, AND CPU PLL would only like 1.547, anything else at this clock speed just failed prime immediately...

But that aside, i just found that going higher and higher with volts didnt work at all (except cpu).... But i have no experience with quads.

Also negev i have a mate which has a Q9450 and he has a xfx 790i and he claims he runs his at 3.8ghz on water cooling... Ill see what his settings are and see what he might have done differently

ol'norton

10-21-2008, 11:47 PM

There is so much of this I don't understand, but I'll start with this

Core1 GTL Ref is higher than the rest of the Cores by default, and is linked to NB Gtl!

How are they linked? When raising one do you need to raise the other, in which case, why have seperate controls. :shrug:

I have all the voltages on default & are stable @ 9X 440 FSB Memory @ 1760 7-7-7. with all GTL ref voltages on default.
At 445fsb I pass 3 or 4 out of 5 passes on Linpack.
If I find the "magic" GTL settings for my E8500, it should stabilise 445 FSB & maybe higher. Is that right?

negev

10-22-2008, 12:24 AM

Also negev i have a mate which has a Q9450 and he has a xfx 790i and he claims he runs his at 3.8ghz on water cooling... Ill see what his settings are and see what he might have done differently

1. Create new motherboard with $$$ pricetag and 200,000 BIOS options to confuse everyone and disguise the fact that it's closely rivalled by an alarm clock

2. ?????????

3. PROFIT!!

Kidding, I love my BO really :D

Ryan12

10-22-2008, 02:11 AM

Mmmm my mate overclocked this E8400 on his xfx 790i to 4.8 under 1.5 volts easy.... now i cant overclock it to even 4.5 even with 1.6... Such a joke...
Degrading chip you ask? I would have thought that if it hadn't of come straight from his motherboard to my blackops from just sitting at 4.8

negev

10-22-2008, 06:28 AM

If anyone is in south east london and willing to let me try my Q9450 in a different board I'd be very interested and even willing to pay for the time involved.

Sooo many times I've heard people say they couldn't get the results they wanted with this board using parts that clock like mad on other boards.... I don't have another board to use as a frame of reference so I can't really give an opinion of how true this is.

Xello

10-22-2008, 06:40 AM

Xello's QX9650 isn't an exceptional sample or anything, it's run of the mill.

Correction, it sucks :D needs 1.45v and not a single bit less for 4ghz (100% stable) :mad: Still i use EIST so not too worried about it dying any time soon..

By the way i need 1.58v NB for 421fsb, 1.67v for 450fsb, to be 100% stable. Funny thing is the inbetween value from what i remember (i posted about it somewhere) actually makes it unstable. I firmly believe that there are tons of chips like Q9450's out there that will run higher clocks than my hugely expensive QX chip with alot less volts :rolleyes: But i'm happy with 4ghz anyways.

negev

10-22-2008, 06:42 AM

Xello, have you tried your cpu on another board? Would be very interested to see settings for 4ghz on something else..

*cough*CLASSACTION*cough*

Xello

10-22-2008, 06:47 AM

Xello, have you tried your cpu on another board? Would be very interested to see settings for 4ghz on something else..

*cough*CLASSACTION*cough*

Nah, i'm not generally into doing this more than once every 3-4 years, i wish i had the time to make it a proper hobby :down:

ol'norton

10-22-2008, 09:44 PM

Yeah, my QX9650 needed 1.67 NB to get 450FSB stable, but giving it 1.7 (NB watercooled) didn't help me get any higher.
The same chip on my P5Q3 Deluxe managed 490FSB stable with 1.70 NB. (NB on air)

http://img154.imageshack.us/img154/7224/490fsbstablemp7.th.jpg (http://img154.imageshack.us/my.php?image=490fsbstablemp7.jpg)

Ryan12

10-23-2008, 01:44 AM

I am going to try my E8400 on a gigabyte p35... I know its an older board, however id be keen to see the results! Ill let you guys know how i do

negev

10-23-2008, 06:23 AM

Yeah, my QX9650 needed 1.67 NB to get 450FSB stable, but giving it 1.7 (NB watercooled) didn't help me get any higher.
The same chip on my P5Q3 Deluxe managed 490FSB stable with 1.70 NB. (NB on air)

So it seems that, for lots of people, this board sucks?

Ryan12

10-23-2008, 03:44 PM

So it seems that, for lots of people, this board sucks?
Mmmm well for the $550 AUD that i paid i did expect lots more then what ive got so far... Did i expect to much lol

ol'norton

10-23-2008, 11:37 PM

So it seems that, for lots of people, this board sucks?

Of the 5 boards I've had my QX9650 in, 450FSB stable is the lowest, but I wouldn't say this board sucks.
It just doesn't suffer fools. ie there are easier boards to overclock than this one.
But with the dual core this is pretty good for 5 passes of Linpack with these voltages.
Admittedly I had to slow the memory down to do it, & I only seem to have 2 mem multipliers that work.

http://img518.imageshack.us/img518/9366/4466stockvoltsfq7.th.jpg (http://img518.imageshack.us/my.php?image=4466stockvoltsfq7.jpg)

negev

10-23-2008, 11:41 PM

Ever get a slow dawning sense of realisation that you've been had?

Ryan12

10-24-2008, 12:06 AM

It was out of this and the rampage.... After looking at the rampage reviews and results sadly i think i might of made the wrong decision :(

Gendo

10-24-2008, 12:06 AM

So it seems that, for lots of people, this board sucks?

Maybe it's not the board that sucks but the overclocker?:p: This board has been optimized to run yorkfield quadcores, if some one with this cpu can't get it to work properly it must be either him doing something wrong, the cpu that sucks or the wrong mem(chips) for this board. A combination of all above is possible too, from the results I have seen I can't imagine it's the board.:confused:

negev

10-24-2008, 12:31 AM

Maybe it's not the board that sucks but the overclocker?:p: This board has been optimized to run yorkfield quadcores, if some one with this cpu can't get it to work properly it must be either him doing something wrong, the cpu that sucks or the wrong mem(chips) for this board. A combination of all above is possible too, from the results I have seen I can't imagine it's the board.:confused:

Even though loads of people have reported that they can't get their cpus to clock as high as they do on other boards, no matter what settings they try?

Gendo

10-24-2008, 12:41 AM

I don't know man. All I know is that the board was designed for quads. I don't have one to test it out myself but I can imagine it just takes more tweaking than on other boards. The blackops allowes a lot more settings to be set manually than other boards. A problem that comes with this may be that finding the optimal for one setting requires you to change a different setting. Changing this second setting might result in you having to change the first setting again. I guess you have to set everything perfectly balanced:p:

RAYTTK

10-24-2008, 09:40 AM

[QUOTE]I don't know man. All I know is that the board was designed for quads. I don't have one to test it out myself but I can imagine it just takes more tweaking than on other boards. The blackops allowes a lot more settings to be set manually than other boards. A problem that comes with this may be that finding the optimal for one setting requires you to change a different setting. Changing this second setting might result in you having to change the first setting again. I guess you have to set everything perfectly balanced
/QUOTE]

Yeah your Kinda right but If you look at alot of the posts on this subject there are a lot of people only getting medium results from a board that costs Mega Bucks, I have had the same results with a Q6600 on a £100 P35 and a 680i. I have tried a Q9450 and a QX6850 on this board but cant get past 3.8 & Ive been hard at this board for four months. Im not too bothered tho as I bought the board for the watercooling on the north bridge & that definately works Great 35c @ 3.750ghz plus its neat with just two watertubes. still room for air circulation inside the case. The Gigabyte P35 was upto 60c on the northbridge when overclocked to 3.6 & the 680i looked like a crash victim on life support with the innovatek black pearl blocks fitted.

saxile

10-24-2008, 01:55 PM

I'll have to chime in and say that this board far from sucks. It does have a few bugs in it, but it is a hell of a lot better than the Asus Maximus I had flashed Rampage. Best I would pull with that board and my Q6600 was 3.8 at 70c on water (and that board over volted like mad) now with my blackops I'm hitting almost right at 4.1ghz, still have some tweaks to make it fully stable, but at 4.05 it is rock solid.

RAYTTK

10-24-2008, 02:12 PM

Saxile, Could you post your settings for the 4.05 please:up:

saxile

10-24-2008, 03:01 PM

Saxile, Could you post your settings for the 4.05 please:up:

Roger, will do when I get home, still at work on my mobile phone (which, by the way, is overclocked too!).

CPU Speed in Windows is 4055.18 MHZ

Edit: Here ya go
Multi x9
FSB 450
Cpu to Ram 1:4 CPU400
Cpu Volt Multi 1.075
Cpu volt 1.500
Cpu Target 1.6125 (1.59 real)
Pll 1.584304
VTT 1.650
NB 1.763 (water cooled)
SB 1.688
Ram 2.044
GTL are Default

RAYTTK

10-25-2008, 01:30 AM

Woooow thems high volts , Are you using them 24/7 ? I have only tried upto 1.5v on my cpu I will give them ago on mine , watch this space

negev

10-25-2008, 02:58 AM

*holds hands ready near the window to catch RAYTTK's cpu shortly after it explodes off the board and flies several miles through the air*

saxile

10-25-2008, 04:54 AM

Woooow thems high volts , Are you using them 24/7 ? I have only tried upto 1.5v on my cpu I will give them ago on mine , watch this space

Yep 24/7, this little 65nm loves volts, plus they love VTT volts

Sailindawg

10-25-2008, 05:09 AM

Saxile, nice clocks, once I get my NB water cooled, I'd like to try your settings. What batch is your Q6600 from? What RAM are you running?

saxile

10-25-2008, 06:04 AM

Saxile, nice clocks, once I get my NB water cooled, I'd like to try your settings. What batch is your Q6600 from? What RAM are you running?

Not sure batch off top of my head, mobile again. Ram is Patriot Viper 1800 at 7-7-7-20 t1, prolly can get tighter but still working on max fsb first. I could drop the volts a bit but it's not 24 hour prime stable that way, get a hiccup about 15 hours into it.

Sailindawg

10-25-2008, 06:39 AM

Nice RAM. I assume that your running 2x1G? The 2G kit is very nicely priced. (http://www.newegg.com/Product/ProductList.aspx?Submit=ENE&N=2010170147%2050002204%201052430386&name=DDR3%201800%20(PC3%2014400)) At what volts are you running 7-7-7-20 t1 at?Edit: regarding Vdimm, I went back and read your post, I missed Vdimm.

RAYTTK

10-25-2008, 07:00 AM

Ok I have tried your settings Saxile & yes I can boot up into windows at 4.1 with my QX6850:clap: and temps are still quite respectable.
I cannot however get more than 32 mins Prime95 stable and getting BOSD with Intel burn test on the 1st run. Whats the Max volts you have tried? I dont feel good putting more than 1.6 through this chip.
I have gone back to my OC gear setting of 3.75 right now because i have some work to do & my settings are-
CPU- 1.43
VTT-1.200
PPL-1.508
NB-1.300
SB-1.500
DRAM-1.80
With these settings everything is between 30c-32c
I cant understand why it needs so much more volts just for that little bit more ghz

saxile

10-25-2008, 08:07 AM

saxile

10-25-2008, 07:39 PM

Sailindawg

10-26-2008, 07:36 AM

The link for the 2x1G kit is no longer there on Newegg from when I posted yesterday. The link I put up had the kit you posted, then 2x1G, and the 2x2G kit. The 2x1 was ~$150. Today,. newegg has the 2x1G kit as deactivated. Wow. That is a sweet kit you have. I was going to wait to upgrade RAM until the low volt, low latency kits started coming out for Nahalem. Those kits ought run real well on this board.

Bandito

10-28-2008, 02:02 AM

http://www.abload.de/thumb/2ztb.png (http://www.abload.de/image.php?img=2ztb.png)
[/URL]

Saaya, where is the ground that these reference to? As in, I am about to solder some wires on, but I will need a ground to reference each of these four to - where is it please. And thanks for the guide:up:

Edit: I suppose it might be referenced back to 5v gorund from the power supply or similar, but I would have thought it would be regulated further, and only acessible at a tuning point.

Ryan12

10-29-2008, 04:05 AM

So it seems that, for lots of people, this board sucks?
negev, just asked my mate to send over his overclocked xfx 790i details with his Q9450
Multiplier - 8x
Vcore - 1.4 in bios, think REAL was 1.33 in BIOS
and all his other settings he left on auto
cpu fsb volts - 1.35v (auto in his bios)
memory - 2.2v
All the rest are autos (so i cant get values)
Seems to have either a good motherboard or a very good cpu if no one here can get 3.8 on the blackops board (from what ive read on the 9450 cpu).

negev

10-29-2008, 07:41 AM

Ryan12

10-29-2008, 02:08 PM

Hey ryan, as far as i know clock speed limitation should largely be the cpu. There is no way that board should outperform the Blackops, so either he's got a wicked cpu or the blackops is not very good.

Any chance you can borrow his 9450 and try it on your BO?
I can see, he does have a watercooling setup so he might not want to take it all apart, but ill certainly ask if i can give it a go

3BABY

10-31-2008, 12:33 AM

Hey Guys,

ok, so reading this thread ive seen alot of people that are pulling their hair out about getting stable FSB overclocks outs this board. ive tryed a few CPUs on this board, and really the main reason for buying this board was to prove its pricetag by putting in the Dogiest Quad i got my hands on and testing the hell out of it. this post is more to Quad related. as i havent had much experience with Duals on this board, and from what Gendo said:

This board has been optimized to run yorkfield quadcores

it really looks like this board was built for Quads.

some of my voltages and/or methods may not be agreed on by others but they work (or have worked for me).. always have, from what i understand 45nm Quads (and duals) like a VTT of around 1.38 anything higher doesnt give any advantage and will only kill your CPU eventualy, 65nm quads like around 1.5-1.565v anything too much higher and youll get the same (degradation) but the 65nm quads are more lenient with voltage.

You HAVE to adjust GTLs and correctly to get higher FSB. on a 45nm Quads adjust GTLs to as close to 63% of VTT, on 65nm adjust GTLs as close to 67% of VTT. if you cant work out how, you need to measure them using a Multimeter and Saaya's pics in Post#1

below are some pics of the Q6600 i chose to give a hiding, Newest batch i could find, High VID, absolute pig from a golden chip, max bootable was 493fsb, max windows useable was 488fsb, stable i havent tested. but to get 450stable wont be hard. please note some of my voltages are HIGH. but to overclock you need Power right :D

http://img510.imageshack.us/img510/5762/q66bu3.jpg (http://imageshack.us)

and heres some screenies

http://img137.imageshack.us/img137/6066/img0004kt8.jpg (http://imageshack.us)

http://img112.imageshack.us/img112/1039/488pl7cas7fe4.jpg (http://imageshack.us)

http://img231.imageshack.us/img231/2990/img0010zb7.jpg (http://imageshack.us)

http://img112.imageshack.us/img112/3227/img0011ge4.jpg (http://imageshack.us)

This is by far the best X38/X48 board ive used, some 45nm quad numbers to come later :D