???? (my first post in this thread)Quote:
Originally Posted by saaya
Printable View
???? (my first post in this thread)Quote:
Originally Posted by saaya
I think he confused you with me, I made that joke. Yes, women are nice here and cheap :D
well isnt that obvious? :DQuote:
Originally Posted by massman
of course its speculation!
since quite some people read this and some even posted that they are worried about getting this or another 1156 board, i figured it might make sense to sum up what might have caused it and to list what people could do to avoid this from happening... the lowest vcore that you guys used and had it blow/melt a pad was 1.5v vcore though, right? so this def wont affect normal end users and even normal overclockers...
they definately can, and amd too... whether they do it or just replace processors without checking is another question :DQuote:
Originally Posted by kiwi
cirthix, kiwi, my bad... no idea why i confused you with each other :D
Are you sure? Do they store the maximum frequency ever in some registers? If so what is the purpose? I am just curious :)
no im not sure, and if they store it its obviously for statistics or rma control or researching why a certain cpu failed.Quote:
Originally Posted by kiwi
Wprime over 5180 @ -102 Celsuis on an 870 with 8 threads yesterday and checked the socket today and found this;
http://img8.imageshack.us/img8/7877/pic23k.jpg
This is the ASUS Maximus III ROG this time using the same 'Foxconn socket' as the GB board. Same corner of the socket as the others too - coincidence? CPU pads were clean for those wondering.The CPU that was in the ASUS board this time has some discoloured and mishapen VCC pads, although none have gone missing completely. Power draw was in the region of 20.5 amps on the EPS12V line. Factor 15-20% switching loss, and also some power to the VTT rail from that figure - so what around 160-170w to the CPU @ -100 is enough to light up the sh1thouse in some cases. Ran the same CPU in the EVGA board at 5.2 the day before and no problems (it uses a CPU socket from LOTE I think)
later...
wow, foxconn cutting back of on quality during these financial crisis times ?Quote:
Originally Posted by raju
Not sure if its just the socket as the first CPU I had burned out a pad in the EVGA board although the socket took zero damage. The thing with the LOTE socket seems to be that it can handle the current, but that does not protect the CPU if there's a problem at the CPU side of things.
I just did a quick VCC pin check - looks like around ~ 175 VCC pins to i5 and around 250+ to i7. Power draw between both is very very close, i5 just is'nt designed for this kind of use under 8 thread loads (not that we did not already know...lol).
I should add at this point, if you run 8 thread Linx over 4.4GHz at ambient temps the power draw of some CPU's is very much the same as what I was pulling at near 5.2 @ -100. Only you don't have the luxury of the cooling preventing a serious burnout. So next time one of the stability boys harps on about needing to see 8 hours of Prime etc on 4.3GHz + OC's using the i5 platform , tell him to 'F*** O**!'.
Thx for the share Raja.
My 860 comes this week.....still not sure if i want to toss it in UD4P or UD6.
I think the phase will matter none at all as both use the same socket.
raju: please what Vcore you used when socket "burn"? Thanks.
VID under load was 1.57V for 5.19GHz. It's the current that matters most, you can pull higher current even with lower VID. If the CPU consumes more than 160w to VCC then consider yourself to be in the red zone for some CPU's/sockets. Load up i5/i7 with Linx at 4.4GHz and it's likely you will pull this much on some CPU's even if VID is under 1.40V. Or if benching, use a clamp meter on EPS 12V, if you see 20 amps+ under load, you best back off unless you don't mind the risk. Other than that, there may be further precautions that I don't know about. It depends what the other guys were running when they burned out their boards/CPU's.Quote:
Originally Posted by borec
yes it is clear for me...
this is big problem potentially for all mobos with foxconn sockets, not only GB...
I think, EVGA classified with a more gold in socket, will have not problem...
S*IT Intel with his 1156 layout! :down:
The extra pin thickness of some sockets may help a bit, but you still get burned CPU VCC pads even when the pins are fine. Bottom line is you have fewer VCC pads on i5 with current draw like i7 at the same frequency. On boards with thicker socket pins, the CPU pads stand a good chance of more damage than the pins (the thinner pins get hot and bend away from the CPU), so its kinda lose lose either way if you wanna push the platform real hard.Quote:
Originally Posted by borec
My R3F is still alive when I test it 5.4G+ 32M.;):D
32m is like 7 amps of draw max - no wonder you are ok ;) Try 1024M @ 20+ amps :DQuote:
Originally Posted by AndreYang
It was obvious all the time, that amps can burn the socket that way. I was testing Wprime and Vantage as well.. low frequencys at that point, but still a lot more load for the board.
I think we should just test lighter applications :)
Seems to be clearer now ;) whish for every body that should be fixed ...so the lesson is to be carefull now ^^
Thx for the share Raju (and I really liked your post up ahead : so true lol)
32m, 3dmark, 01, 03 and 05 should be fine.
I only posted today because we had a few guys speculating in this thread that we don't know how to insulate or have too much lint in our sockets. I give the prize to the 1 VCC pin question myself :)
Just to be clear, is this risk present at the X58 i7's aswell? or does it have way more VCC pads?
Im not around for that long already, but no reports have been made regarding burned pads with the X58 i7's right?
i dont know if i havent paid attention before or what but these P55 board pins do seem a bit more fragile or easier to bend
hopefully its just a socket replacement
This socket and the shape of it's pins suck...I told you.... ;)
There are more to come out of it in time...... ;)
The LOTE socket has better pins (the EVGA sockets are better), but you guys don't forget you have 75 less VCC pads on i5. SO just looking at the socket pins shape as the cause is not going to cure this issue. i7 has over 250 VCC pins while i5 seems to have about 175. ALmost same current draw with less pads. I lost one VCC pad even on the LOTE socket (which by the way has the same kind of pins we saw on the i7 sockets). So failing a complete redesign of the pin and contact area (pad size/density/count), there is not too much that can or will be done at this stage.
not really, they had problems with 1366 as well and that was before the crysis... :/Quote:
Originally Posted by eva2000
well it does what its supposed to do... see it from their point, why should they spend even a fraction of a cent more per socket if its good enough for the rated specs intel asks them for?
thats what foxconn is great at, good enough for as cheap as possible...
i dont want to defend them, for ocing their sockets seem to suck...
thx for all the testing raja! great stuff! :toast:
are you sure its the vcc pins though and not vss pins?
wasnt it the vss pins that had diagonal rows 1 pin thick and vcc were 2 rows thick? it looks like there is one burned pin, then right to it 2 pins are barely burned or ok, and then theres a clearly singed pin again...
160W only can cause this... damn...
thats def achievable on air without even trying too hard...
i checked the intel docs but couldnt find any rating as to current draw per pin... theres just a max resistance per pin value i found...
i wonder if intels specs are that tight or if foxconn actually fails the specs intel asks for...
ps, its lotes, not lote afaik?
It is LOTES, just me being a bit hasty in typing and checking.
Whichever way you look at it, it's current draw related. 160+w is pushing the socket design quite hard it seems, and yes running Linx you can get to this quite easily over 4.3GHz, so people just need to be a little more cautious, no need to torture the design too much to prove its stable or otherwise.
Both times it has happened to me on two different CPU's (one was a real bad CPU for frequency only 4.8Ghz max), it has been when I have seen full load EPS 12v draw at 20.5 amps (both times different boards). PWM efficiency at these kinds of loads should be 80-85% at a guess, and then you have say 30-40w (guess) going to VTT as well, so 160-180w to VCC.
BTW even on the beefy pin sockets, the the contact point density is pretty much the same and limited by the pad design of the CPU. Real solution here would be just to have more VCC pads.
Do all eVGA boards have the LOTES socket or just the classifieds?
This thread made me nervous as hell lol, was testing stability at 4Ghz 1.3vcore/1.25VTT on my i7 860 and FTW in LinX.... for 2 hours. =/
Everything runs ok and I didn't smell anything but this makes me want to go and break the rig down and check it.
Well boys, thank you for lot interesting informations :up:
i hope other brands will do something what can stop this socket burning challenge :(
1.3v isn't alotQuote:
Originally Posted by Chr0n1c
It's the current you need to be conerned about, most CPU's won't pull more than 160w until you have them to 4.3~4.4GHz and then run LinX. VID could be anything from low to high, what matters is the current.
Ok, I misinterped that vcore would impact the current, well I haven't gone that high on the chip for stability testing with linx. Tried 4.2Ghz but it failed ~2 minutes in. Only have done 2hour tests @ 4GHz.
Soooo it appears I'm A-okay! I'm done using LinX though! lol!
Thanks guys.
primary factor is current and frequency, don't be too concerned about the VID. The leakage of processors varies, but by and large to be stable at X frequncy they all draw similar levels of current (at least with ambient temps). Of course, VID becomes an issue if you start pumping in a lot more than the chip actually needs.
I think you're right about the amount of VCC pins/pads raju.
As far as I remember from my electromechanics studies a few years ago the circumference of a conductor is based on the current flowing through it. Higher current needs higher circumference and in this case higher current -> more pins/pads
Thinking about that the burning pins/pads make me believe those pins had slightly (or much) higher resistance than the other pins probably because of bad quality/impurities on or in the pins.
They were running a bit out of spec but I still don't like seeing this happen, especially not on boards that have a sign saying "better overclocking"
I'm hoping this is a one in a million issue since I'm thinking about buying the exact same motherboard real soon =o
ya know, this picture reminds me of something i saw, where a guy was trying to fake an RMA, claiming his socket melted, but it was obviously just damaged by something hitting it, this is actually what a melted socket looks like. ahh.. that's some crap.
hmmmm i just looked it up in the intel doc again and... the burned pins seem to be vss, not vcc? do you have more pics of it raja?
actually makes sense cause there is only 1 vss pin for every 2 vcc pins?
Don't read too much into that. The bottom of the processor shows the burn marks on the VCC pads not the VSS. The VSS pins got hot and fell away (from the neighboring heat) while the VCC pins left indents in the VCC pads (with coloration).Quote:
Originally Posted by saaya
I doubt any i5 can run linx @ 4.4 on air :D Maybe in winter with low ambients only but temperature would be a major issue
So raju, you want us all burn our cpus and mobos? :D
Quote:
Originally Posted by kiwi
On the contrary, if I wanted you to burn them, do you think I would have posted all of this? :)
I think the real answer to that question is in the sig of this post;
http://www.xtremesystems.org/forums/...&postcount=118
Wish it don't disturb you ? In that case I'm sorry and I could delete it.
:) I've seen so much people only talking about burning instead of try to feel Spi essence :shrug:
Long stress times for a stabilitaty that don't mind :ROTF: or they don't know how it had been acheieved...8h...12h...24h...I've never understood really.
That's why I love what you said lol and what you're doing here is very respectfull mate :clap:
peace
Quote:
Originally Posted by Benny Lodewijk
:rolleyes::rolleyes:
I saw a similar case for MSI GD80 MB, similar location, air-cooling!
Seems to be primarily related to an issue at the CPU end.
the gd80 also uses a foxconn socket...
raja and hipro, do you think a redesigned socket with better shaped pins and maybe thicker pins and contact heads and higher pressure onto the pads will make a big diference?
how many extra watts can a lotes or other more robust socket deliver without running into these problems?
so far it hasnt happened on lotes sockets it seems...
thx for all the input and testing raja! :toast:
It may help a little (contact point density and width), fundamental issue though is the lack of VCC pads - 33% fewer VCC pins than 1366 with almost the same current draw. The LOTES make it slightly less likely, but don't prevent it from happening as shown in the fist pic I posted all the way back at the start of the thread.
I should add that I received pic of a another CPU/socket (FOxconn) that burned out this morning at around 7-10 amps of draw at 5Ghz running a single thread of 32M. So I really don't know what is safe at this point nor do I believe this is soley a socket related issue, could be soemthing fundamentally weak within the CPU die itself, no idea. Put that together with the reported 4GHz OC from a member above and something deeper may be amiss with some CPU's.
eek, that sounds serious...
CPU die cant be the problem otherwise the burn would occur in the die itself.Quote:
Originally Posted by raju
What might be a problem is if each core has its own vcc/vss pads which would mean single core ops are as dangerous or more-so than multicore ops.
Not if there's a power distribution issue. Doubt Intel would give each core it's very own pads, the whole grid should be in parallel (easy to check for continuity btw). The fact it's always in the same place of the VCC pads points at something deeper.Quote:
Originally Posted by STEvil
I doubt that intel would have done anything different from a dedicated vcc plane, but it is curious that the mark appears at the same spot on different boards...
does anybody have a dead i7? would be interesting to sand the pcb down layer by layer and see how the pads are meshed together...
that might reveal something to explain why it always happens at the same spots...
or, like i said previously, if you look at the socket and the lever and the way the socket moves and closes, it seems the pressure isnt distributed evenly among all pins... the top of the socket seems to get more pressure than the rest, and vcc is only on the left side...
If that's the case and only the cornermost VCC pads were making contact, it would require an extreme amount of lift at the bottom right corner of the CPU/socket. Given the amount of signal pins in the lower corner, I don't think that it is possible the CPU would even post if the socket were that borked.Quote:
Originally Posted by saaya
The socket has a "seating plane" which enforces fixed distance between pins and package, you can't really push the CPU too hard (i.e. overtightening pot screws). How can the pressure against the pins be too low or too high?
since the contact spot between the pins and the pads definately shifts depending on the pressure, i thought this might affect the contact... but the top of the pins looks round enough to compensate for the drift, and yes your right, the seating plane prevents too much pressure...
Where are you getting your numbers for power characteristics/comparison?Quote:
Originally Posted by raju
intel.com :) its all there in the white papers...
its just quite messy cause its not clear what info is in what whitepaper :D
iirc its in the cpu whitepapers, not chipset, platform or electric/mechanic spec whitepaper.
theres a pinout map and details about pins
Raja,
I'm on the UD6 now with an 860, thought i would just document some stuff for ya.
Vcore about 1.40 real....did not use LLC.
VTT about 1.5 ish uncore about 4000 Cpu around 4460 for 1m and 32m.
4gig for wprime 32m and cinebench.
Will update after i go cold but here is the CPU as it sits now.
http://chew.ln2cooling.com/qdig-file...d_IMG_1665.JPG
http://chew.ln2cooling.com/qdig-file...l_IMG_1669.JPG
As Sascha said and secondly with my own measurements using power clamp meters.Quote:
Originally Posted by G H Z
Quote:
Originally Posted by chew*
You might get lucky Chew. There are others that have pushed as hard as me and had no issues, while some have only ran 32m around 5G's and had a nasty burnout. End result I bet is that it will be erratic from user to user. I do know Intel is looking into it though.
got clamp? :D
check current draw, you might have a low leakage chip :)
Don't think either of the benches he ran pulls too much at 4G's in terms of current (around 120-130w tops I suspect). Don't wanna tell him to torture it needlessly either. It's a case of, if you've got one that works, treat it nice.
BTW forgot to add here (this is kinda important). I've had no burn outs on the LOTES sockets. The board I thought was using a LOTES (the EVGA E657) had a Foxconn socket, the second one they sent me has a LOTES socket. The single pin burn pic I posted earlier (page 1) was from the Foxconn socket board. So, just to summise, no burnouts with LOTES at all so far.
From my P55-UD3R review in the "Xtreme Reviews" section...
Quote:
Originally Posted by miahallen
I just love it when a heavy hitter like George comments :D
Only thing i can say for sure is no issues on LOTES thus far for me using the same CPU's at higher clocks in some cases.http://img93.imageshack.us/img93/551...me5222e659.jpgQuote:
Originally Posted by miahallen
This is the CPU that casued the ROG board to burn out. Stuck it in the E659 and 5.22GHz = no burnout on the LOTES socket..
before you said this it actually sounded you might be onto something but now it sounds like your guy's VTT claims back in P45 days :p: hehehehQuote:
Originally Posted by raju
juuuust messing with ya :p:
Expect nothing less from you (I always know when I'm onto something if it tweaks your input) :) . Hard to nail it for sure when people have it at different levels of current draw. Seems the Foxconn socket is the common denominator (stay away from Foxconn socket boards..lol - I'm sure you'll like that) ;).Quote:
Originally Posted by dinos22
Hah I plan to torture it regardless.Quote:
Originally Posted by raju
I fully expect to have issues.
I have a killawatt hooked up and minimal graphics draw.
I will document at what point I have issues.
Be my guest :)Quote:
Originally Posted by chew*
It'll be interetsing to see what happens if anything.
Hmm...I have seen this thread only now. Of course, I do not have the high electronics knowledge that some of the speakers in this thread have, but I can tell you guys what I got from a mechanical point of view, related to the pin fragility issue.
So when I first tested the UD6 under cold, I just mounted my pot in the "regular" manner, with quite some tension on the screws. It didn't boot up, and I had to seriously loosen the screws in order for the board to boot. I have played with the same thing on Asus and MSI boards as well, and none of them will boot if the pot is to tighly fit on the CPU. So I do not know about the shape of the pins and the current (as hipro explained it in this thread), but I am really sure that this new socket is also very flimsy from a mechanical point of view.
I had the same issue the first time I hooked up my water block for some 32M eff testing. I had to modify my Swiftech 1366 hold-down to work for 1156...at my first attempt to boot, I got a fast boot loop sequesnce. Nothing fixed it until I loosened up the block....everything has been fine since then :shrug:
You might be on to something there with how tight the pot is screwed on. I was under Cascade and the thing was acting like a real dog, its a ES chip so I didnt expect much. Another problem is the eraser reallys gets into this socket badly and could be pushing the chip in strange ways. I dont mean inside the socket, just the outside areas, down in the IHS etc.Quote:
Originally Posted by Monstru
No socket burn with 1.75 vcore and 1.5vtt combos and my chip shows no signs of damage on the contact side.
The whole Foxconn socket mech seems sensitive to mounting pressure (and flimsy pins), that would explain the non boots if pins are not connecting.
Sorry guys, a little off topic, but similar.
Does anyone know what would cause this? http://www.xtremesystems.org/forums/...&postcount=174
I do not feel like going through the process to repost pics on here.
I was running my X3440@1.36v@4ghz(200x19+turbo for x20) left running for only 2.5 hrs during sleep. Air cooled with Megahalem & ICD7. Temps full load mid to high 60's mobo is a UD2, need more info, let me know. Thanks
Edit: for the record, mobo is toast. End Edit
Ehh looks like you just had a bad fet. It happens. Might want to add active cooling to the fets or at least some heatsinks.
I would say if anything it would be a high leaker. Its an ES and it runs rather warm.Quote:
Originally Posted by saaya
I wonder if any of these cases are LLC enabled related?
CPU PWM FET burnout.Quote:
Originally Posted by INFRNL
Insufficient cooling on that board for OC, especially if you enable Loadline calibration too. You really need a good fan pointing at those FET's to keep them cool if overclocking on this board.
Quote:
Originally Posted by chew*
Thanks,Quote:
Originally Posted by raju
I will see if I can get it replaced and either try a better board or add some fans to blow on the board itself. :up:
there are other fets that look roasted if not toast as well on the edge of the last pic...Quote:
Originally Posted by INFRNL
seems that they got really hot... as in 125C :S
if you would have been there while it happened, holding your ear over the board, you might have heard a quiet "hot hot hot HOT HOT HOTTTT!!!" before it blew up ^^
have you guys seen this?
http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/...d,2436-15.html
asrock msi and ecs all have problems with their pwms burning on 1156 boards, and at measily vcore of 1.3-1.4v...
those are value boards, sure... but i havent heard of this happening since amds 140W issues...
and yes, of course those boards dont have beefy pwms... but they should shut down and not burn...
it looks like thre is definately something wrong with the 1156 power design guide...
i highly doubt all these mb makers are breaking the spec or guidelines from intel...
Hmm, and what will happen when they implement over current protection in bios as they say? The board will just shut off when I use 1.36+V and that's it? Basically I will save the board from burning but I will be heavily limited
That problem is down to no heatsinks on the FET's for one thing. Some of those PWM circuits are limited to around 120-140amps tops. When you then use LLC and ramp the processor frequency with VID it's not good at all (without a heatsink and active cooling of those FET's near their peak current handling its a disaster waiting to happen). Those boards are best used for sub 3.6Ghz overclocks in the long run. The vendors don't add too much to boards in this price bracket to encourage product segregation and to justify the existence of higher end boards.
That's not quite truth...Asrock P55-PRO has heatsink on mofets and Msi has to even if is small...Quote:
That problem is down to no heatsinks on the FET's for one thing.
http://media.bestofmicro.com/P55-Mai...-225678-13.jpg
And even so for example Asrock VRM is in configuration 8+2 phases and 2 mofets per each phase.....Why sould't be these enough? Or 1.3v> the power consumption of 750/860 increase exponentialy? ....
And IIRC, LLC is not part of the intel spec which is why I never use it.Quote:
Originally Posted by raju
Depends on how well the FET's are contacting the heatsink, and if the sink is actively being cooled (thermal runaway issues can happen if contact is poor and also if LLC is causing oscillation). Also need to factor the current handling per FET. Upto 4GHz most CPU's will not pull more than 140w to VCC (some may pull a bit higher but not all).Quote:
Originally Posted by xdan
Depends on how that LLC is designed. Some VRM solutions can support a tighter droop specification than 0.05v. So long as peak overshoot does not breach the applied VID for longer than Intel spec. On the cheapo boards LLC implementations are generally outside spec at higher current draw, but people call the board crap if the vendor does not include some kind of droop control.Quote:
Originally Posted by chew*
Err should I be concerned about this? Just reading this thread is making me pretty nervous - I have a UD3R by the way. I've been rather busy, so I'm currently at 3.4Ghz (stock vcore) on my i5. What's the deal - should i be restricting vcore/VTT to prevent socket burn?
did you meassure this?Quote:
Upto 4GHz most CPU's will not pull more than 140w to VCC (some may pull a bit higher but not all).
i highly doubt that... my 920 D0 pulls more than 130W at stock speed with all 8 threads loaded... im 100% sure but unfortunately dont have a watt meter...
A fully loaded Xeon W3540 running Linx at 4.45GHz, EPS draw is around 21.5 amps. Around 250W of total draw on EPS 12V - 15~20% switching loss, 40w to VTT, around 160w to VCC. Do you think a 870 @ 4GHz pulls more to VCC than a Xeon W3540?Quote:
Originally Posted by saaya
Pretty much what I come up with also. It's quite common to take a reading and forget about the inherent losses. I see the same thing with load testing screenshots. Using the value a Kill-A-Watt shows and not taking into consideration the loss across the variac.Quote:
Originally Posted by raju
i dont know about an 870... :shrug:Quote:
Originally Posted by raju
where do you get the 15-20% switching loss though?
the pwm engineers at foxconn told me the load efficiency of the p6t, gigabyte x58 extreme and BR are all around 90%
im sure the "24phase" thing from gigabyte has a worse efficiency though...
but this is a 1366 cpu, so i guess you meassured it on the evga 1366 digital pwm? if the efficiency is around 90% you get 25W more for vcc, around 185W...
even if the efficiency is really only 80-85%, i wouldnt be surprised if the low temperature is making quite a diference here, and current draw at higher temps is notably diferent.
Quote:
Originally Posted by saaya
Most PWM circuits have an efificieny of 85% at the very best. The 4.45Ghz measurement was not on a cascade but water cooled at ambient temps. THe 870's CPU's do not pull more than 1366 CPU's to VCC - I have checked. What have you measured? Nothing I suspect :rolleyes:
At high loads, a good motherboard supply will peak at or barely below 90% efficiency.
Measured at ambient temps using an Intel stock cooler on an 870 running Linx - 15.7 amps peak (186w total current draw) running Linx 8 threads 64 bit with 4 GB memory at 1800MHz. Take 30w-40w for VTT considering Intel's 25 amp or so stock spec (not considering any other sub rail like PCH etc) , then even considering a 90% efficiency you get 140W to VCC. :) Peak PWM efficiency is usually deliverd at around half load handling of the circuit btw, which is why I generally cite around 85% given modulation of loads etc..
Cinebench full thread test only draws 12.9 amps from the EPS line.
my new P55-GD80 have a LOTES socket... but i have a problem. When I have Vcore over 1,49V board has shut down and phase led display show 0. I think this is over current protect? this is no good ... :shakes:
//btw i7 860 @ 4200MHz 1,44V full load 8 threads with linx no problem for socket
Ok so looking at the last page I see someone saying that one of his boards had LOTES, the other had a Foxconn. Is there a possibility that all mobo manuf. will release updated versions with better sockets in the future? Then there's discussion of LLC being a factor as well. Am I getting this right? I haven't enabled LLC and am leaving Intel-spec vdroop in place for the moment...
I usually pop boards faster than Kirstie Alley can down a gallon of ice cream but I have over 800 hours on each of those boards without a problem. 400 hours of that is full load overclocks in a case with only the power supply providing airflow exhaust.Quote:
Originally Posted by saaya
So, either he had some really bad luck or something else is going on. Granted I have kept my voltages under 1.4 real with air cooling, but not a single hiccup yet. That said they are all back in cases right now for another round of testing.
To top it off, my burnt pad problem (it happens on air too) has only occurred on the top end boards so far. :confused:
IF he uses a "not that good PSU" to feed 12V on the VCore Mos-fets, this could happen...."Spikes" will travel through the PSU to the Mos-fets and cause them failure..... ;)
I have ONLY TWO PHASE circuit here and I can draw EASY ~225Watts.... ;)
Also I want to inform you something about efficiency on them.....The hotter the go, the LESS efficiency you get out of them.... ;)
You'll get LESS efficiency is the Mos-Fet works without a heatsink at - ex. 95*C and you get more if it works at ex. 50*C.... :)
Quote:
Originally Posted by hipro5
Yes that is right, as the FET temps increase RDS-on will change and this will affect the efficiency.
Hmmm........I like you M8..... :up: :DQuote:
Originally Posted by raju
I hope you don't mind, but hipro are you retired? :yawn: I didn't saw any new benches from you and I really like your stuff
Overclocking is bad, mkay?
Carry on finking :)Quote:
Originally Posted by Russian