Printable View
Is it me or do most of you that achieve a stable overclock almost always have your vcore 1.xx where xx is the multiplier you have.
let me take an example
My friend need 1.51 vcore for 51 multiplier, and my work buddy needs 1.49 vcore for 4.9 oc. This ofc only applies when ht is on.
.... or am i just having delusions.
lol good one man
Let your buddy try 1.52Vcore for 52 multi, if that passes, you are spot on !! You need to apply for a job at Anandtech, they can use somebody like you for sure...
Why stop at Anandtech when Intel could make better use of the info?
This sounds like they don't know anything about what they are actually making! :rofl:Quote:
Originally Posted by raju
LMAO. Toms or Anandtech would love this guy.... and its funny I must break your theory with 4.8 @ 1.4v. I've had 3 SB so far and none of them fit your theory.Quote:
Originally Posted by Leeghoofd
Wouldnt want them to miss out on a multi-million dollar epiphany. :DQuote:
Originally Posted by zalbard
Yeah I'm gonna have to chime in with a no on your theory also as I'm currently running at 5ghz 1.416v and 4.8ghz is rock solid stable at 1.376v. Maybe you should start a poll to see how many chips actually do fit your theory.
:rofl:
My 2600K booted up @ 58X with 1.58V.....but too bad it can't do 59X @ 1.59V:(
:rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl: i need a good chip for 1.7v bootup at 7Ghz
Thats a negative on that theory from me. Top marks for thinking outside the box, but its just wrong :p:
lol @ this thread
LOL. I feel sorry for the dude that started this thread.
I wonder how old this guy is...
bullcrap, just make it 0.9vcore and run at and 9Ghz, just as ganstah as a hyundai on 22 inch rimsQuote:
Originally Posted by dinos22