I don't seem to have issues running my uncore higher that qpi either. Actually my more stable overclocking runs have been with uncore higher than qpi...
Printable View
I don't seem to have issues running my uncore higher that qpi either. Actually my more stable overclocking runs have been with uncore higher than qpi...
My 1st pc vantage run - -
SteveRo..what a setup with all these SSD's ...i hope you want to try my Chess test!!
Just send you a PM.
JP.
working on the lower multipliers ... already.Quote:
Originally Posted by Nanobot
for your 1600Mhz kit, try to increase the QPI/MemCtrl voltage a little. (at your own risk .. lol)
who?
EDIT: Dr. Who is the lower QPI multi something that intel needs to work out first or just bios implementation? also mem 9 multi in addition to lower QPI multis is on my GB wish list, so I can run my mem at stock 1600 or little over instead of trying to OC to >1800 with 10 multi...emailed GB with my wish list...but dont know what is possible and what not.
I may run my 24/7 at 4.2, if stays stable, 1 hr so far, still at reasonable vcore. Mine scales at 1 notch higher vcore for every ~23mhz (1 mhz increase in bclk with 23 multi). Also raising cpu pll and ioh core couple notches seems to help on mine. rest settings on pic.
4.2 prime 1h so far with 1.41 bios, 1.376 load.
4.1 15hrs stable 1.38bios/1.34 load
4.0 12hrs stable 1.35 bios/1.31 load
good job RGE
4.2 with HT on @ 1.4v is very impressive!
Mem runs at 930mhz(12 hours memtest stable) these Gskill Blacks are great!! Prime crashed afte 1 hour 15 minutes. I am still working on it as I dont think its just a voltage issue. I wll get 4.3 stable.Quote:
Originally Posted by sonofander
nice OC Bootsy!
what version of memtest are you running?
also, does anyone know where to get a list of the order that P95 runs its tests in?
damn i bought my Ci7 to eraly. ;)Quote:
Originally Posted by Drwho?
I hope we see those with westmere. :D
My cpu seems to OC pretty well with low vcore, but it runs hot. I just hosed my 4.2 run, got impatient and ran linpack at same time as prime, it froze at 10th pass of linpack and little over 2 hrs prime. But glad I did, if it cant handle both at same time, it usually reboots at some point, even at 8 hr piss me off point. So up 1 notch vcore and run again.Quote:
Originally Posted by sonofander
^^That is pretty sweet on air, and nice low vcore.
are you outside? ;)
m3kk - wow - excellent - how long can you prime with that?
I have not tried the cold yet. But he could easily be inside. In my sig, though i am on water, mine will do 4600, sub 9 spi at 1.49 cpuz, and that is inside with 26C ambients.Quote:
Originally Posted by Bobbylite
In fact I will let u know in hour or so on mine:p:....but I am betting cold does very little, especially after seeing some on ln etc.
EDIT: ok room temp boot max is 4670 at 26C with 1.62vcore, even 1.66vcore did not help (had vtt 1.46, cpu pll 1.98, IOH 1.18), forgot to get screen of it, but pic is 4600 at room temp 26C with spi at 1.5, and validate here:
http://valid.canardpc.com/show_oc.php?id=462368 room temp
EDIT 2:Outside in 5C, open case, box fan up against computer blasting 5C air through my case forcing air through my rads at ?3x air speed of my yates, let set for 30 mins. Max boot was 4760 or 90 mhz gain by going out in cold, ran at 1.64 and 1.66vcore, but would not go 1 baseclock higher (failed to load windows), all settings same as room temp above. (cpuz says 1.68 when 1.66 vcore in bios with loadline...somewhere around 1.6 sensors or volts gets inaccurate.)
so 90 mhz gain...more than I thought, but much less than 200+mhz gain of my E6850 by taking it out in cold.
it kills me... I need to set 1.475v bios to be prime stable at 4.3 w/ HT disabled! doesn't look like I got the best clocking chip :(Quote:
Originally Posted by rge
at least my temps aren't bad :rolleyes:
If you ready closely you will see that I said running QPI at or past 4.0GHz results in no POST, not the other way around ;) I added some more information to my original post as well, to make this more clear. Furthermore, I added a note that addresses the example you gave.Quote:
Originally Posted by HKPolice
Overall, the idea behind my testing was to discover limitations of Core i7 920 and i7 940. Core i7 965 EE certainly has more flexibility in that you should be able to keep your BCLK (and therefore QPI) lower while running better memory due to unclocked multipliers. Furthermore, the idea behind my testing was not to cripple the chip features to get higher clocks (such as turning off HT/cores, etc.) or to be running voltages that are dangerously close to absolute maximums (e.g., 1.5V+).
Some may consider 1.5V safe, but I'd be betting those chips will not be surviving very long of they are run most of the day over extended periods of time. In my opinion, if I cannot stay below 1.46V the clocks I am demanding are too high. But, only time will show.
No, the ambient temp was ~15 oC.Quote:
Originally Posted by Bobbylite
I will try with open window when will have -10 outside :D.
No prime at this speed :).Quote:
Originally Posted by SteveRo
what IS your setup? what speeds are you running?Quote:
Originally Posted by dejanh
Whats your batch #?Quote:
Originally Posted by sonofander
I already listed my current settings several times...Quote:
Originally Posted by sonofander
http://www.xtremesystems.org/forums/...&postcount=880
I can also run it with Turbo on without any issues, though I do have to bump the voltage up slightly.
I'm on R2E 0804 BIOS (beta I believe), Core i7 940 w/ CoolerMaster V8 heatsink, 6GB Corsair Dominator 1600MHz triple-channel...
3836A514Quote:
Originally Posted by btdvox
maybe you should just list it in your sigQuote:
Originally Posted by dejanh
I'm too embarased to post it...still running a single 9600GT, waiting for the 55nm NVIDIA GTX parts :p: I should really put my rig under water too, at least the CPU and chipset. My ambient temps are very high as I like my room warm (21C - 23C normally, around the computer it gets quite a bit hotter too as it is in a corner with no air circulation). I think this is limiting my OC as well as I get up to 91C using 1.46V @ 4.14GHz. I was first overclocking with the stock cooler and I noticed that I could get higher clocks with lower volts using the V8, which leads me to think that going water would be even better (i.e., even higher clocks with lower volts, or at the very least lower volts for same clocks).Quote:
Originally Posted by sonofander
Very impressive! I was at 4.6 Prime stable for about two hours until I ran into a loop problem with my H20 setup. Now I seem to be fine at 4.4 but this CPU is a hot tamale!Quote:
Originally Posted by M3kk
Just a quick fix to RealTemp so the new Load meter is more accurate. Thanks rge for pointing that out.
The About box will show you what version you have.
http://www.fileden.com/files/2008/3/...alTempBeta.zip
thanks for the update unclewebb :up:
over 13 hours prime still going @ 4.137ghz 197 x 19 + turbo , HT on, bios f4k, im gonna stop it , still need to drop voltages or press on for 4.2ghz :shrug:
edit...... stopped prime after 14 hours
Now I see why everyone is loving the new platform!!
Some early results on stock air
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v3...ack/Second.jpg
Love that bandwidth and latency!!
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v3...0bclk32GHz.png
my 920 is a batch 3837a714 that any good? I am waiting for my psu before I can power the new machine on. :(
Dejanh, very nice post man.
my new 920
3837B072
http://pics.mwirths.de/pics/thumb/920_3837B072_3800.jpg
4.2ghz ,1 1/2 hours of prime still going HT on, turbo on, loves the vcore :down: , might try f4l next :shrug:
What the hell? How can you have turbo when you are not running your default multiplier? Some kind of feature (bug) in the Gigabyte BIOS?Quote:
Originally Posted by freshy
If it is, I want this on the R2E...
On a different note, I think I finalized my clocks more or less for now. I am running at 179x23 (with turbo on) for a 4117MHz net core clock, 4 cores, 8 threads. Memory is running at 1794MHz and I will probably tighten the timings a bit from the current 8-8-8-24-2T. The voltage required to do this was 1.448V core, 1.35 QPI/DRAM, 1.65V DRAM. All else is auto, including LLC. All CPU power states are enabled as well (i.e., all settings are default).
This seems to be where my air-cooling caps out. If I bump the volts any higher temps are climbing to 90s so I think I will stay right here max. Right now I cap out at about 88C with all 8 threads loaded 100% over extended periods of time.
Maybe I will get better cooling down the line, but we'll see. Not bad for air though I think :p:
MSR registers on cpu show max multi/turbo as 23,23,23,24 on i940, which is apparently what governs turbo, unless bios can set other limits. With turbo enabled i920 will always be at 21 multi, and i940 23 multi, regardless of setting multi in bios at 15, 17, 18 or whatever. If you want +2 multi, you have to deactive all cores but one in bios...so dont see purpose of +2 multi.Quote:
Originally Posted by dejanh
If Asus bios is doing something differently, would be good to know. It would be nice to be able to set turbo limits ourselves...so I can use 21 etc multis with my i940 with turbo enabled.
And yeah 4.1 on air is pretty good, Im on water and that is likely where I will end up for 24/7.
finally found my 24/7 settings, tought im not totally through with testing for QPI/VTT voltage and RAM voltage/timings.
Clocks and CPU volts are final. :)
http://www.abload.de/img/24-7settings80qj.jpg
right now im on 1.33V QPI voltage, maybe i can lower it a bit.
For the Rams i'll try CL6 DDR3-1200.
DDR3-1600 CL8 is not possible with 12GB, i get errors in memtest within a few minutes... i think its the cooling. With 6 stick that close togther i need aktive cooling for the ram, and right now i have no 6cm fan. ;)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
started priming at 11.10 pm @ 4.2ghz , computer restarted at 7.48 am
so 8 hours and 38 minutes of prime @ 4.2ghz , now tell me that doesnt suck !!!!
ok voltages for 4.2ghz 8 hours 38 mins of prime
200 x 19 + turbo, HT on
cpu vcore 1.55v
qpi/vtt 1.535v
cpu pll 1.88v
qpipll 1.18v
ioh core 1.24v
ich i/o 1.58v
ich core 1.22v
vdimm 1.66v
qpi link was x36
and uncore was running at 3400mhz
____________________________________
voltages for 4.137ghz stopped after 14 hours of prime
197 x 19 + turbo, HT on
qpi link x 36
uncore frequency x17
vcore 1.49375v
qpi/vtt 1.495v
cpu/pll 1.88v
qpi/pll 1.18v
ioh core 1.14v
ich i/o 1.58v
ich core 1.16v
vdimm 1.66v
_________________________________________
voltages for 4.1ghz 14 hours prime
195 x 19 + turbo HT on
qpi link x36
uncore frequency x18
cpu vcore 1.45v
qpi/vtt 1.435v
vdimm 1.64v
everything else auto
_________________________________________
voltages for 4ghz 13 hours prime
191 x 19 + turbo , HT on
qpi link x36
uncore frequency x18
vcore 1.375v
qpi/vtt 1.315v
vdimm 1.64v
rest auto
and now that ive spent all that time getting system stable, im gonna flash to new bios f4l and start again :shrug:
edit... scratch that, day off today i got a head ach ! lol , to be continued tomorrow !!!
How is Everest Ultimate's stability test as far as i7 24/7 use?
freshy how you lovin the gtz, what rad are you using?
hey bobby, yep its a nice block, and im only using a MCR220 and MCP655 ~~Swiftech MCRES , might have to upgrade to a 3x120 rad tho, summer is here in australia gonna start getting real hot soon, 40 to 46c days:eek:, ive also got an apogee gt that i had lapped and was using on my q6600, might have to make a mount for it and throw it on , see what temps i get compaired to GTZ,
lol im trying to wait a while before i lap this i7 cpu, even thinking of lapping gtz , but i know guys here at xs dont like lapping water blocks :sofa:
What are the best batch numbers to look for ?
The gtz has a bow machined into it, lapping it would be detrimental to it's performance.Quote:
Originally Posted by freshy
mine is batch 3837A727
REVISION CO/C1
got it from mwave U.S.A
edit... and yep thats what ppl said about my apogee gt before i lapped that, and after i lapped it i was @ 1.6v with max temps 54c @ 100% load occt with q6600
Here is Winter kicking in, my room's door is always closed and it is still cold and i'm yet to test my WC capacity as i've had a few issues with my 4870X2 (took the chance to get my case worked on) but now i should be jumping to the i7 and will check the performance of my GTZ. ;)
thanks man, that's my new sig.Quote:
Originally Posted by derektm
On my i940, not only does turbo on multi come at cheaper vcore...it looks like dropping the multi and using higher bclk reduces the vcore requirement as well. At least to reach 4.1 via 23x182 (turbo on perma 23 multi) or 21x196 turbo off I can use 2 notches lower vcore at least, than is required for stock multi 22x187 at 4.1 for same 12+hrs prime stable. Like some i920's that dont like their stock 20 multi, maybe my i940 does not like my stock 22 multi. On mine the uncore mhz to qpi mhz does not seem to play a role, as I can run 16 or 17 or 18 uncore, and only alters qpi volts requirment, but not vcore requirement. Maybe just similar to some E8xxx that ran with lower vcore at same mhz by dropping multi and higher FSB, and turbo mode just a different animal.
F4j bios all with LLC enabled
4.1ghz, (182x22, turbo on 23 multi) vcore 1.38bios, 1.34 load for prime stable 12+hrs
4.1 (187x22 turbo off) vcore 1.4bios, 1.36 load for prime stable, 1 notch below fails, 2 notches below at same bios volts as using 4.1 turbo 182x23 is clearly unstable.
4.1 (196x21 turbo off) vcore back to 1.38 bios, 1.34 load prime stable for 12+hrs, and trying lower currently...see pic.
For 4ghz (182x22) I need 1.35 bios, lower fails. When I ran 21x191 4ghz and 20x200 4ghz I only tried same 1.35, which was stable...apparently at least for 21x191 I might need less.
Which is good news for my i940, I can run 21x196 turbo off 4.1, and finally run near my stock memory using 8x multi, instead of either way underclocking or way overclocking memory, and use same lower vcore that 4.1 via permanent turbo on 23 multi x182 allowed.
Very good batch!:up:Quote:
Originally Posted by webwilli
Asus BIOS is doing something significantly differently. On Asus boards turbo can only be used if the multiplier is set to Auto (i.e., default multiplier, but not explicitly keyed in). Otherwise, turbo is automatically disabled and becomes unavailable. So yeah, this is a big PITA. That is a huge implementation difference.Quote:
Originally Posted by rge
So to reiterate, if you manually specify the multiplier on an Asus board, even if it is 22x for i7 940 or 20x for i7 920, turbo will be disabled regardless and you have no option to turn it on.
Now, in terms of your post on lower multi x higher BCLK requiring less voltage, yes, that is true. I have noticed that as well. For the same clocks, I can usually lower the volts by about 0.01V - 0.02V if using higher BCLK over higher multiplier. This is completly contrary to what you would expect and detrimental to overclocking performance. On an AMD platform being able to increase the multiplier was always the pefered and cheaper way to overclock than raising the base clock generator value.
Btw, I decided to lower my 24/7 OC on air from 4.14GHz to 3.96GHz due to temps that I was not comfortable with. Indeed, I had TM function enabled which was reducing the multipler when the processor got too hot so I disabled it and then the temps peak out at about 97C on air. Not acceptable in my opinion, even though the system is stable. Reduction shaved off about 12C - 14C overall. Until I get better cooling I am not going higher. At least this way my memory runs at a healthy 1804MHz :)
Hello, I have a strange problem with the configuration in my sig: I am stable at 4Ghz with temps below 80 if I use a 160x25 multi, but with 167x24 I can't get it stable for the life of me.
My voltages:
vcore 1.34375
dram 1.64
qpi/dram 1.35
I don't think raising the vcore should be necessary since the cpu frequency doesn't change. Which voltage do you suggest I tweak? I think qpi would help a lot, but can I safely go above 1.35 with that one? I seem to remember 1.35 as the limit declared by Intel. Am I wrong?
That is interesting with the bios differences in turbo between Asus an GB, thanks for the info. Also good to know you found .01 to .02v lower on higher bclk same mhz clocks...I am 2 notches lower so far (.012), I need to keep going and see how low can get vcore.
No kidding with temps, even my dedicated PA120.3 for just cpu with GTZ is barely keeping my temps in check on prime load...hovers at 77C after 10hrs, 79-80max.
Um, I think you got something mixed up here...Quote:
Originally Posted by Cooperdale
25x160MHz = 4.0GHz
25x167MHz = 4.175GHz
That's 175MHz difference between the two. Up your core voltage to about 1.40V and try from there...no need to increase QPI/DRAM voltage. Chances are however that unless you have a very good chip (i.e., one of the golden ones that run low volts and high clocks) you will most likely need about 1.46V - 1.47V at that clock though.
Yeah, indeed. The temps are nuts on these chips. They seem to run hotter than even the 140W AMD parts :shocked: One thing I am concerned about is that if I buy a nice WC system, and it only ends up shaving like 10C - 15C off the temps that may just get me about 4.2GHz (4.3GHz if I am extremely lucky) out of the chip for 24/7 use and I am not really sure that is really worth it for having spent like $400-$500 on a nice WC system...Quote:
Originally Posted by rge
After all, I am not going for any OC records here really...
Is that with 1.38v vcore and HT enabled, RGE?
Oh, sorry, I simply mistyped. I meant 24x167Mhz=4008Ghz. That's why I think I should be able to keep the vcore I'm using for 25x160 (1.34375V). The cpu frequency is the same, but I have difficulties raising the BCLK from 160 to 167.Quote:
Originally Posted by dejanh
Up your volts by just one notch (approx. 0.006V) and then try. Your clocks are not exactly the same and yes, before you say "but it's only 8MHz" it is 8MHz, and with these chips it can make a world of difference. Also, different multiplier combinations with different BCLK values require different voltages. On the i7 920 and i7 940 higher BCLK with lower multiplier though usually means slightly lower voltages. Maybe it is not always the case though.Quote:
Originally Posted by Cooperdale
Anyway, just try upping it by one, max two notches. Also, you got the XE chip and it overclocks the best on the R2E board, not the P6T-Deluxe. Why did you go for that board with an XE chip?
I'm always trying to think up new ideas and features for RealTemp so how about this one?
Intel designs the Core i7 to start to thermal throttle at about 98C which should keep the temperature below 100C as long as things aren't too crazy. This works fine at default clocks with default core voltage but when you're running a healthy overclock, 100C is just too damn hot. You'll usually lose stability and crash before this temperature.
How about a feature that let's a user choose the maximum temperature they'd like their CPU to run at. RealTemp could automatically adjust the thermal throttle for you and slow your CPU down when necessary to keep your temps at a maximum of 90C or whatever number you like and then automatically go back to full speed as soon as the temperature allows.
This way when you come up with an overclock that you are happy with, you won't have to adjust it at all for 24/7 use. If the sun comes out or some tiny thing changes, you'll still be OK. You'll be in complete control of the maximum temperature your CPU hits.
Open up the Settings window in RealTemp and you can play around with the thermal throttle by making adjustments in the Clock Modulation section while running Prime Small FFTs. It manually gives you complete control over your maximum temperature. I think if I modified this feature so it was automatic, it could be very useful especially for guys trying to run a Core i7 with air cooling. Any thoughts? Is this idea :up: or :down:
Um, well...two things...Quote:
Originally Posted by unclewebb
I am using RealTemp now (version 2.90, latest update) and my thermal throttling starts way before 98C. In fact, my throttling starts at about 85C - 87C, at least according to RealTemp as it is reporting that temperature when throttling starts to happen. How come? Where did you get this 98C figure?
In terms of RealTemp being able to cause the CPU to throttle, good idea, as long as the temps are correct :p: :up:
Im pretty sure its 98c where it throttles down, couple people in this thread have had it happen.
Does RealTemp show you are throttling at those temperatures? Can you post a screen shot of that?Quote:
Originally Posted by dejanh
If the Thermal Status area of RealTemp is reporting OK then your CPU hasn't been throttling.
The Core 2 CPUs throttled when Distance to TJMax was about 2 or about 98C. I've seen one or two Core i7 screen shots that seemed to show the same thing but I haven't personally run a Core i7 up to that temperature.
Edit: Here's a pic from a few pages ago of SteveRo's CPU hitting 97C without setting the thermal throttle off.
The Thermal Status section of RealTemp reads the bit within these CPUs that keeps track of any thermal throttling episodes.
http://img155.imageshack.us/img155/2902/rthotso2.png
Not to get too off topic here. If you're interested in testing out Automatic throttling then send me a PM and I'll get to work on it. Should be very easy to code.
Well, I just aim for 4Ghz, I don't want to do extreme oc, since I'm on air. So I thought the P6T would be fine. Moreover, I have 8 Sata drives and the R2E only has 7 connectors, didn't want to bother with addon cards.Quote:
Originally Posted by dejanh
But I didn't know there would be big differences. What's the advantage of R2E in particular? Lower voltages?
Oh and anyway, what are the suggested QPI voltages? Is there an absolute upper limit, or would say 1.4V be fine?
You're kidding, big time :up:Quote:
Originally Posted by unclewebb
RealTemp is reporting OK, but the CPU is definitly throttling. I found out this morning while doing some more testing on my 4.14GHz OC. As soon as temps hit around 85C-ish the multiplier started to drop (reported by CPU-Z). I am pretty sure I can get a before and after screenshot for you so you can see it.Quote:
Originally Posted by unclewebb
Give me a few minutes, I'll try to get you the screens...
dejanh: Show a sceen shot of RT and CPU-Z if you can. Does the multi drop because the Turbo turns off or does it drop right down to 12? rge noticed this depending on what bios version he was running and how many threads of Prime he had running.
No it does not drop right down to 12. It throttles from 23 (turbo) down to 22. But throttling is throttling. It is happening because the thermals are getting too high so turbo shuts off...always at the same point too, when the temps are around 85C-87C. The multiplier will drop to 22.5x, then 22x, then if the temps drop a bit (say below 86C) it will go back up to 23X. The screen shot below shows it throttling at 89C. I don't know what the business of BIOS is here, but every R2E BIOS behaves the same as this. There have been no changes to anything that has to do with thermal management.Quote:
Originally Posted by unclewebb
Not saying that it's a bug so much as that it may just be a feature oversight (if there is two-stage throttling, it should be reflected somehow). Anyway, here it is...and 8 thread test...
Thanks for posting that. If the multiplier is dropping from 23 to 22 that's not technically thermal throttling, it's just the turbo kicking out.
I'm not 100% convinced that CPU-Z is correct though. rge provided me with the Intel documentation for calculating the multiplier for Core i7 and I worked with him to hopefully get this right. Neither of us have come across any documentation from Intel showing that half (0.5) multipliers exist for Core i7. They exist for 45nm Core 2 CPUs but not for Core i7. I'm not sure what CPU-Z is reporting when it reports this.
Here's a post from rge over on the XS RealTemp forum:
http://www.xtremesystems.org/forums/...postcount=2731
The Intel approved / recommended method for calculating the multiplier when the Core i7 Turbo is enabled uses timers located in the processor that CPU-Z does not seem to be using. RealTemp is showing the multi steady at 23 in both of your screen shots. We'll have to wait for a few more updates from CPU-Z to see what the truth is.
Well isn't that interesting...I'm curious if it is really kicking turbo off or not. RealTemp seems to be showing it as using turbo still, even on my screenshot...Quote:
Originally Posted by unclewebb
Edit: I decided to do another run, and yes, the multiplier does drop. CPU-Z is not wrong on that one (not sure about the 1/2 multipliers). RealTemp also started showing 180x22 instead of 180x23 (not visible in my screenshot as this happens a few minutes after CPU-Z already reports a lower multipler). So what is kicking in here? Why is it dropping the multiplier and always around 87C+ if this is not some sort of throttling kicking in? I just quickly reviewed the Intel specs and they mention two types of thermal throttling that work in conjunction, but I do not have time to review the details...
I told rge to drop by here sometime so he can shed some light on this. I know he has experimented with different bios versions that have handled kicking the turbo off differently. He ran some Super PI benches originally to show me that the early versions of RealTemp and Everest were wrong. I'm not sure if a Super Pi bench or an XS Bench while running Prime 95 to maintain your core temperature would be able to prove this or not. RealTemp doesn't update the MHz or multiplier while an XS Bench is in progress so keep that in mind if you use that. It's definitely accurate and repeatable enough to show whether your computer is using a 22 or 23 multi but running it while Prime is running will take CPU cycles away from Prime which might cause your temperatures to drop and your CPU-Z reported multi to go back to 23. Maybe 7 threads of Prime with one left over to run an XS Bench might keep the temp high enough to prove this. If you can think of any way to prove this, give it a shot.
I followed the Intel Turbo white paper that rge sent me exactly which was published in November 2008. I don't think I screwed up following their directions and I'm curious too which is really correct. I don't understand why CPU-Z is not using this method.
http://download.intel.com/design/pro...=tech_tb+paper
http://img142.imageshack.us/img142/7016/cpumhzih1.png
dejanh, how about if you disable turbo? Does it drop a multi then when you hit those temps?
Yep, you can tell that though with 8 threads on prime running.Quote:
Originally Posted by Xello
Regarding turbo....turbo disengaging, multi decreasing to stock, or whatever you want to call it, can be set via bios manufacturer complying or not complying with TDP, current, and thermal limits. Sounds like Asus has thermal limited turbo at ~85C, or could be TDP limited and just that you hit that temp whenever TDP limit is reached, or could be both. Also, both on CPUZ and Realtemp, if you are near the turbo TDP/current/temp limit, when the turbo kicks out, temp/tdp decreases, turbo kicks back in, etc the multi bouncing back and forth between 23 and 22 is typical. Though if you run prime and linpack at same time, you might find turbo stays disengaged but dont know for sure as dont know how ASUS is limiting their turbo. The intel white paper lists the three possible constraints, which can be turned off or turned on in some intel bioses, apparently a hidden setting in ASUS and GB bioses where they have implemented for us in some manner:
From what I have seen GB bios F3 is TDP limited, havent tested for thermal though, and F4betas like I am using I believe has TDP etc limits turned off.
I believe RGE is on an F4 GB bios right now, like me, unfortunately (actually it's pretty neat in a way) turbo is permanently on, so there's no way to test the whole thermal control system :shrug: And in fact i don't recall seeing anything in the GB bios to do with turning that thermal control on or off. There is something there but i think it's to do with the actual thermal threshhold of the cpu when it will shut down / throttle, i don't think there's anything specifically to do with the turbo mode like there is on the Asus board.
Heh yeah, i'm sitting between 45 and 50c right now with 1.35v prime blend loaded, i dread to think what will happen to temps if i turned HT on.Quote:
Originally Posted by rge
Has this something to do with Vista System panel reporting wrong cpu speeds for high multipliers? In my case only some softwares (cpu-z, Real-Temp, TurboV, some Everest pages) report the right cpu frequency when I'm at 160x25. Most softwares report 3.84Ghz, as though the multi were 24. Turbo is off though, but I think the problem is with Vista reading the default cpu multi (24 for the 965EE) and multiplying it for the Bclk. This happens with any software I've tried except for the ones I've mentioned.
Cpu-z though reports 4Ghz as if it were a constant frequency, whereas Real-Temp reports many variations, with the multi covering all the range from 20 to 25.
Ahhh, this is turning into a real headache :shakes: Asus does not even have the ability do disengage TDP limit on any of their boards, so there is no way for me to test this. I can technically disable the whole CPU TM function which supposedly disables the TDP limit as well except that the fallout of that can be a dead CPU in case the temps get too high. Not exactly something I am willing to do on a $800 CAD processor.Quote:
Originally Posted by rge
In any case, this seems to be another nuisance on top of many already when trying to OC this chip. Now it looks like that unless I can keep the temps below 85C all the time I better not be expecting turbo to give me a performance boost. I wish the board manufacturers would standardize on something...
Maybe it's time to go to a 965 XE to avoid this mess in overclocking...anyone interested in buying my Core i7 940? I'll give a good price :)
With speedstep enabled, Realtemp will report varying multis depending on background activity of computer ie cores active vs not. CPUZ reports constant multi with speedstep enabled, ie does not seem to work correctly with speedstep enabled. If you disable C1E and EIST, then both Realtemp and CPUZ should report a stable multi.Quote:
Originally Posted by Cooperdale
for me cpu-z also reports varying multis, same as realtemp. :yepp:Quote:
Originally Posted by rge
LOL...interesting, and you also have GB extreme? Crazy how everybody is seeing different things with different bioses, setups, OS, etc. Are you on vista? I just enabled speedstep and checked again, Realtemp fluctuates and reads lower multis, cpuz stays rock solid at bios setting 21 multi, but I am on XP...apparently something different between my setup and yours.Quote:
Originally Posted by Hornet331
any tests done 1600 cas9 vs 1200 cas6 etc?
Because if what was said is true about the x16/x16/x8 and droping memory down to x6 and uncore to x14 or x15 @ 200x21 you are at ddr3-1200. Why buy a 1600mhz kit then right?
Well, hopefully tighter timings.Quote:
Originally Posted by Bobbylite
Anyway, I'm on x18/x16/x8 right now with 200 bclk and Priming. I had it at x18/x18/x8 and it failed after 5 hours.
I'm at 3200 CPU/3600 QPI/3200 Uncore/1600MHz RAM
Are people using SmallFFTs or Blend or both?
Here is my i940. I forgot to take a picture of it after 8 hours of prime95. Highest temp was 88 during that run.
vcpu 1.325
pll 1.81
qpi 1.39
One thing I mentioned to rge is that how Windows is set up also plays a part in your actual multiplier at idle. If you have C1E and Speedstep enabled in the bios, you will also need to have your Power Options set appropriately so your multi isn't jumping up and down at idle.Quote:
Originally Posted by Cooperdale
In XP set your Power Options like this to get the full effect of C1E and the lower power states:
The picture is of my Q6600 dropping from 9.0 to 6.0.
http://img380.imageshack.us/img380/5580/q6600c1ern4.png
For Vista you need to reduce your Minimum Processor State:
http://img258.imageshack.us/img258/7249/vistac1ehf1.png
If RealTemp is reporting that your multi is jumping up and down it's because it is jumping up and down. I decided to let RealTemp start telling it like it is and then users will at least know exactly what's going on and they can decide what needs to be adjusted in the bios or Windows or both.
Edit: Another thing that rge has noticed is some of the numbers displayed by CPU-Z simply don't add up. It seems to be using multipliers of 1/2, 1/4, 1/8 or even 1/16 internally in some of its calculations:
http://img367.imageshack.us/img367/896/rgegc1.jpg
196.0 X 21 does not equal 4111.5.
It equals 4116.0 MHz
even when i was priming @ 4.2ghz with turbo on , HT on my temps just hit 90, and that was with these voltages and i did not see any throttling , but i have cpu thermal monitor disabled in bios (bios f4k) on ud5
screen shot was taken while @ 4.1ghz with turbo on HT on but i have it set the same for when i was priming at 4.2ghz, anyway i think im gonna flash to f4l now and give that a goQuote:
ok voltages for 4.2ghz 8 hours 38 mins of prime
200 x 19 + turbo, HT on
cpu vcore 1.55v
qpi/vtt 1.535v
cpu pll 1.88v
qpipll 1.18v
ioh core 1.24v
ich i/o 1.58v
ich core 1.22v
vdimm 1.66v
qpi link was x36
and uncore was running at 3400mhz
This is my i7-920 presently on a P6T deluxe. presently running 2 260 Gtx 192 core Cards in SLI.
Cpu is water cooled with swiftech GTZ WB
http://img514.imageshack.us/img514/3337/i74000lr9.jpg
is there any performance benefit or detriment to running 6x1gb sticks? Like I know the octa-core mac pro benefits from having multiple 8x2gb rather than 4x4gb sticks
This is getting just stupid. Could it really be my cooling that is causing me to have to use such high volts for the same clocks? Just on this page there are 4 people running 4GHz+ overclocks with i7 920/940 with voltages between 1.32V and 1.36V. I cannot get true 4.0GHz stable in any combination of BCLK x multi unless I use 1.416V (CPU-Z). Even for 3.96GHz I need 1.40V.Quote:
Originally Posted by Silaz
Don't get me wrong, I am not complaining about the OC (I did expect more though out of the i7 940), but about the volts needed to get the OC. Has anybody gone from air to water and confirmed that volts can drop for same clocks? I have seen a voltage drop for same clocks going from stock air to aftermarket air, but is the same true for air to water?
I wonder how much is dependent on VQPI. Some of the better OCs I have seen seem to pump VQPI way beyond the 1.35 limit Intel recommends.Quote:
Originally Posted by dejanh
I have found keeping QPI frequency under 3800 Mhz helps the overclock a lot.
Yeah, you do not want to do that really. Not too much anyway. That's probably the #1 way to kill this chip.Quote:
Originally Posted by gooddog
Pictures speak louder than words :D
http://img392.imageshack.us/img392/8...ndpaperex7.jpg
http://img392.imageshack.us/img392/4849/shinyzy2.png
http://img367.imageshack.us/img367/4848/upclosewd7.jpg
http://img100.imageshack.us/img100/2469/topcf8.jpg
http://img100.imageshack.us/img100/5078/pcvu9.jpg
http://img528.imageshack.us/img528/97/scoresu9.png
Actually Speedstep is disabled, that's the strange thing. I will double check into the bios though. I've saved and loaded so many profiles, I may have missed something.Quote:
Originally Posted by rge
Quote:
Originally Posted by gooddog
In my setup, OC is incredibly VQPI dipendent. I am running stable at 160x25 (20 hours of Prime95, 4 hours of Prime95+LinX, 10 runs with two instances of LinX running on half the memory each and with affinity to 4 cores each). I managed to lower temps on air to rare peaks of about 83°, with an average of about 80°. Not the most silent rig I ever had though ;).Quote:
Originally Posted by dejanh
Vcore is 1.34375 and VQPI is at 1.35, and I think I'm safe here, but if I lower it a bit, say 1.325, Windows will freeze at boot! Without touching any other setting.
If I raise the BCLK, I can't get stable even with higher vcore, unless I raise VQPI to almost 1.4V. I decided to let it go since my aim was 4Ghz and I'm there. But I hate how so many softwares report wrong cpu speed even at load. Can't fix them all I guess.
Yep im on vista 64 and using the Extreme.Quote:
Originally Posted by rge
http://www.abload.de/img/multi12xthbc.jpghttp://www.abload.de/img/multi14xccrq.jpg
http://www.abload.de/img/multi18x4gsv.jpg
in the second picture, igonre the 12x multi on realtemp. Realtemp shows the switches a lot faster then CPU-Z does. :yepp:
Im on F4j and have enabled everything in advance cpu settings beside c5/6/7.
^^It looks like speedstep with core i7 is working much better on vista 64, than on my xp sp3 32...also looks like cpuz is working better on vista 64. Multis on mine with speedstep (realtemp) vary down to around 15, but dont get lower. They only go to 12 (cpuz and realtemp) if enabled laptop settings, ie force the lower settings....then they stay on 12 unless loaded.
seems so, xp shows its age regarding to hardware. ;)
I was a longtime xp user my self, but with 12gb i decided to switch to vista. :yepp:
When using Vista, do you have to go into the Power Options and reduce the Minimum power state so that RealTemp reports a 12X multi at idle? If this is set to 100%, what does RealTemp and CPU-Z show?Quote:
Originally Posted by Hornet331
I think the two OS have just changed how they handle C1E and how they need to be set up to get the multi to drop to its lowest value.
if its set to minumum 100% it will show always full multi.Quote:
Originally Posted by unclewebb
My final 24/7. 4.2Ghz (200x21) with 1.412 bios LLC, 1.376 load, prime 12+hrs.
QPI/UC/Mem 36/17/8
QPI/Vtt 1.335
Mem 1600mhz 1.64v
CPU PLL, QPI PLL +1
One problem that software has with reporting the correct multiplier is that there are situations when during the standard 1 second reporting interval, the turbo might be engaged for three quarters of a second and disengaged for a quarter of a second. If you have a 940 and your base multiplier is 22 then your average multiplier is going to be 22.75 for this reporting period. How should this be reported is the big question?
This might be when CPU-Z starts reporting 22.5 for the multiplier. Technically that might not be correct since half multipliers don't exist but maybe users would like to see that since it tells them that their turbo is starting to become disengaged. When RealTemp sees an average multiplier of 22.75, it rounds that off to the nearest whole multiplier which is 23. In this situation, RealTemp is telling users that nothing has changed and the turbo is still fully engaged.
The question is, what do users want to see? A half multi that isn't technically correct or some other sort of warning that turbo mode has started to become disengaged?
I re-did my turbo testing tool and it's available here.
http://www.fileden.com/files/2008/3/3/1794507/Turbo.zip
The FileDen was down for a second or two so I also uploaded it here:
http://www.filesavr.com/turbo
This tool calculates your exact average multiplier and displays the results to 3 digits. With a 940 and turbo engaged it should be pretty steady at 23.000
If the turbo starts to become disengaged due to heat or whatever, it should be able to detect that very quickly. I have no idea when CPU-Z will switch to 22.5. Time for some testing to get this mystery sorted out.
This tool is designed for Core i7 but it works with any Core processor. My Q6600 is pretty steady with this tool at 9.000 when fully loaded or it sits fairly steady at 6.000 when C1E / SpeedStep are enabled.
http://img512.imageshack.us/img512/521/turbotoolky4.png
Going to try getting the ram back up to 1600 now :up:
We'll see how that goes.
hi guys,
i just finished putting system together yesterday and everything looks fine with auto bios setting except video crashes sometimes when trying to view youtube full screen. anyways, thats not why im here. im here to see if i can get some help OC my system for image/video editing and some gaming. since i put out a lot of cash for this new system it's pointless to run them at default setting
im an OC newbie so i dont want to go extreme. any tip on on putting my 940 to 3.4-3.6 and ram to 1600 would be greatly appreciated
system specs:
- Antec TruePower Quattro TPQ-1000 1000W ATX12V
- Asus Rampage II Extreme x58
- Intel Core i7 940
- Thermalright "Limited Edition" TRUE Black Ultra-120 eXtreme CPU Heatsink
- 6gig of Corsair Dominator DDR3 1600
- Sapphire Radeon HD 4870 1gig GDDR5
thank you in advance
hey vlocker you might want to take a gander @ http://www.extremetech.com/article2/...129TX1K0000532
Atleast get a feel for what you are doing.
Update from my end...I managed to get 23x179MHz stable after putting on a TRUE instead of the V8. Temps are about 5C-10C lower overall when chip is 100% loaded for extended periods of time. The voltage that is required for this is unfortunately high at 1.46250V BIOS (on R2E this is 1.49250V measured load roughly). After everything, I have concluded that I have a high-voltage chip unfortunately and this is limiting my max overclock. With a lower voltage chip I am sure I could break the 4.3GHz mark, possibly even on air. Temps right now at 4117MHz peak out at 83C on cores 1 and 2, and 81C on cores 3 and 4. This is with 4 cores and 8 threads enabled, all settings Auto except core voltage. Memory is running at 1794MHz with 8-8-8-24-2T timings for my 1600MHz Dominators with 1.67007V in BIOS (1.652V measured load). Basically, I had to back off 1MHz off BCLK to be stable as 23x180MHz would not be stable under any circumstances (I think I fall victim to the runaway amps due to the high voltage and heat when I am running any higher than 23x179MHz).
Overall, alright on air :D
Going to be putting this chip on sale most likely with the V8, and a couple other goodies with it. I will be offering a reasonable bundle price so if anyone is interested PM me and we can talk :)
what are you going to pick up to replace it? I was thinking about possibly doing the same...
Also, I am having memory issues. Anyone else have A 6gb kit of XMS3 1600? I have a hard time running it even at 1600.
Ci7 is the first chip that makes me think about getting a water cooling setup. :D
Cause i think 4.2ghz is possible with my chip with reasonable temps, but aircooling dont cuts it. :p:
This is also my first water cooling setup too. Its definitely the way to go, but it can get super expensive... The justification is that once you get it all together, the future just holds add-ons and upgrades..
I got the NBMAX from swiftech, but am thinking about picking up the EK full block.
Also, anyone using EK's MOSFET blocks? What are the gains using those in place of stock?
I'm running the 6GB kit of XMS3 1600. I am Prime stable with them at 4.117GHz CPU, 1794MHz DRAM, and gaming stable at 4.140GHz CPU, 1804MHz DRAM.Quote:
Originally Posted by bmilos
Timings are 8-8-8-24-2T for now, though I will likely tighten them a bit. I always use the X.M.P. profile in Ai tweaker in the BIOS and then set the DRAM voltage on the R2E to 1.67007V in BIOS (actual measured is approx. 1.65V) and QPI/DRAM to Auto. If you are running 1600MHz+ DRAM your QPI/DRAM needs to be a minimum of 1.35000V in BIOS...at least for the XMS3 kit.