No it wouldn't be :fact:Quote:
Originally Posted by BenchZowner
Printable View
No it wouldn't be :fact:Quote:
Originally Posted by BenchZowner
wow what a great read. gg bz .
although i chose 1 month , i had a feeling it would last alot longer . and now im not so worried about increasing vtt to find stability.
its always being debate and so many opinions on whats dangerously to high.
For clarification, that 0.3v isn't a typo for 0.03v right? I've got vcore at 1.45v (Windows: 1.42v idle, 1.41v load) and VTT at 1.54.Quote:
Originally Posted by mikeyakame
Be it 0.03v which I think is what he meant, or 0.3v, you are still too much over ur Vcore for the VTT voltage. For me, it didn't improve at all to raise it too much and even still I dunno if it help at 1.3v instead of 1.1v but I keep it there for the hell of it. My Vcore 1.38v maximum, 1.36v average on load, E8400 @ 4.32Quote:
Originally Posted by stn0091
If he did mean 0.3v, I'm well within range. I'd have to go past 1.7v VTT with a vcore of 1.45V to break 0.3v.
0.3v or so either way shouldn't hurt it. I try and keep Vtt no more than 0.05v above or below personally, but not every situation allows this depending on the Vcc and chip you are using.
did the chips ever die?
Nope.
But I stopped the test about two months ago.
I got rid of the Striker II Extreme's and allocated the CPUs to other systems that I needed to get up and running.
Thanks for doing all that work, Benchzoner.
What cpu vcores were you putting into the chips? (on air)
and how long were they at those voltages?
I lost the count in the end :D
Some of the chips were running at 1.6V, 1.7V, and some at 1.45V
In the end, I've benched every single CPU at ridiculously high voltages on air/water cooling and extreme cooling, and the bloody bastards are still working :D
And they dind't start to need more voltage(degrading)?
Like I said, they're still running fine using the exact same voltages.
I have stopped this testing though.
Well every chip is different and perhaps stepping affects this, or it's just a case by case scenario.
I saw on another forum someone who had run their QX9650 at 1.45v (core, not vtt) for a lot of bench sessions a bit over 4 ghz, and he said that chip degraded to the point (less than a month) where it wouldn't even complete POST at less than 1.35v @ 4 ghz anymore (originally it ran 4 ghz fully stable somewhere around 1.4v, and no problems entering windows at 1.35v). That's pretty serious degradation.
And someone else (on XS) used to run 3.4-3.6 ghz @ 1.32v linpack stable but after a few weeks of linpack benches, he started needing 1.34v or linpack would fail (or he would have to downclock 200 mhz); E8200 or E8400 I think. The post wasn't that long ago. And this degradation happened with vcores below max vid of 1.3625v...
I guess the moral is, if you can afford to replace the chip, go ahead and gun it responsibly. But if you can't afford to replace it (recession getting into you; even though it seems that everyone on XS is rich, that's definitely NOT the case!), then just be careful with what you do with your hardware, until you're ready/able to replace something that doesn't satisfy you anymore.
I just think the moral is if you get a dud CPU you have a dud CPU... nothing you can do about it then to swap it asap ( RMA ) or be evil and sell it on ebay
been running mine at 512x9 1.408V for months now without issues. :) 1.2VTT 1.54v PLL (actual voltages)