so 1.45v = pretty safe 24/7 vcore for 45nm CPU aka E8400?? i mean is 1.5v too much or ...???
Printable View
so 1.45v = pretty safe 24/7 vcore for 45nm CPU aka E8400?? i mean is 1.5v too much or ...???
I dunno, I ran 1.52V across my E8200 for 3 or so days. Im running stock again because of all this talk of degradation.
We will know that in a few months i guess. I'm gonna keep mine at 1.5v 24/7. No worries here :)
45nm
65nm
90nm
i spose it is possible that intel factored in a safety margin when quoting 1.45V absolute max.
let's see what the guinea pigs turn up
1.5125Vcore 24/7 here
What freq you running and what CPU? I remember when i was testing mine i was at around 4600 or so at 1.63v or something like that and Orthosed for like 10 mins or so with no errors. Coretemp was showing around 90C-95C or so (on air, opened case, 24C ambients) :DQuote:
Originally Posted by dragonhunter
With good cooling these CPU's scale like crazy. Much better then the Conroes IMO.
1.4 should be max for these with adequate cooling. Even at this Vcore it's not a question IF it will degrade but when. I'm assuming that @ 1.4V you could get away with 2-3 years.
Is there an official max Vcore voltage.
I've been running on air until I can get my WC gear in place.
I was originally running 8.5x500=4250 Mhz 1.45 Vcore. Doing some testing I lowered it down to 1.368 Vcore.
Where did this talk about degradation come from.
Well... mine was orthos stable at 4127Mhz with 1.45v BIOS, CPU-Z was 1.41, for about a week. Then all sudden it was unstable.
Had to back it down to 3987Mhz with 1.36 in BIOS, CPU-Z is 1.32
Quote:
Originally Posted by AriciU
4.4ghz prime stable
Ok, so I have my vCore set to 1.485 in BIOS. BUT on CPU-Z it is saying 1.37 idle and about 1.32 load. Which should I be going by?
Same here. Clocks in sig went from 17hr stable (as far as I let P95 blend run) to less than 1hr stable, all in what seemed like overnight. I got it stable again, but it all seems so weird...Quote:
Originally Posted by Motley
This is what Intels specification says:
http://img169.imageshack.us/img169/9...voltagept9.jpg
Vss as far as i understand is ground, so 1.45v fr 45nm is maxium limit
Sounds like you need to update to the 16.B09 beta bios. Go by cpu-z and uguru for actual vcore.http://forum.abit-usa.com/showthread.php?t=122393Quote:
Originally Posted by Pr^_-cision
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ron 61
Ummmm... I really don't want to be a "test monkey". CPU-Z tells me I am running BIOS version 10. The whole "Beta" thing scares me. As long as the CPU-Z readings are correct. I think I'll stay with the BIOS I have. Unless there is some reason that it may be just as bad to stay with them. As long as CPU-Z readings are correct. This really isn't a problem is it?Quote:
As BETA bios's become available to us we will post them here, please use extreme caution as these are beta only BIOS's and for testing purposes. Keep in mind while these beta bios's may fix some issues, they may introduce new ones.
***PLEASE FLASH THE BETA BIOS's FROM DOS, MANY ARE EXPERIENCING BAD FLASH's USING THE FLASH MENU PROGRAM---YOU HAVE BEEN WARNED***
It depends on temperatures too. high voltage low temp is safer than high voltage high temp/
I know this, that's pretty much common sense. What I'm wondering is, just because the setting in the BIOS is high, does that really make a difference as long as it's actually getting the voltage that CPU-Z dishes out. Like does it really matter that i have to set the BIOS to 1.48 and it is only getting 1.38 and with vdroop (full ORTHOS load) only 1.33?Quote:
Originally Posted by Machinus