s7e9h3n, I think you are taking his statement out of context. But I get squeemish if I go over 1.65...
Printable View
s7e9h3n, I think you are taking his statement out of context. But I get squeemish if I go over 1.65...
basically upping the voltage is the same as tightening a wire. Tightening it too much will make it crack. Now if you see nm as the thickness of the wire: 90nm takes about 1.7.. 1.75 is pushing it. Now with a clawhammer (130nm) you can go up to 1.8-1.9, without being afraid it will die (or the wire to be cracked).
lol
I wish I could put 1.75v through my winchester. Anything over 1.55v is pointlesss with my 3000+ .09 chip even with good water cooling and the heat trapper removed it doesn't improve the overclock a bit.
All these new .09 chips I've seen on here are running stable at 1.65v even on air. There seems to be an improvment in the new cores ability to handle voltage or my chip really sucks.
Something tells me anything over 1.65v is pushing it for 24/7 use but I've never been afraid of killing hardware as long as the overclock at the increased voltage was worth it to me. :banana:
1.75v on air/water for extended periods on .09nm will kill the chip guaranteed. not a question of if, but when.
now prime is running over 2 hours with 1.525 + 110% at 312 x 10.
Can someone PLEASE show me an AMD that died of 1.8v+? I see people say this and that about going over 1.65v being able to kill a 90nm A64 but I have yet to see a single post about death due to voltage. I've ramed 2 volts into 4 different 939 chips without a single problem.
haha, besides, a lot of people would have my head for doing something like that to an FX. thanks for the thought anyway :D :toast:Quote:
Originally Posted by s7e9h3n
Afi - for sure man, I hear ya. I ran 1.73v through my one Venice on air daily and never had a problem with extra cooling on the cpu. I think maybe TOO much could possibly give it sudden death related symptoms, but again, no one has come forward with info on this.
I promise you that if you ram 2.0V into my 0512 FX57, you'll kill it within a few attempts....and no, I'm not gonna prove it :p:Quote:
Originally Posted by afireinside
i think that as a general rule of thumb, the more heat a cpu puts out with a given core, voltage and mhz, the less voltage it can take...Quote:
Originally Posted by s7e9h3n
blame the "fast" transistors and "slow" transistors (different oxide gate widths, yes? ;))
I think you lost me on that one :confused: I can bench up to around 1.72Vcore, but anything beyond that get's sketchy.....Quote:
Originally Posted by ozzimark
http://img243.imageshack.us/img243/4...x26232m4bl.jpg
I still to execute my not-so-good-clocking Venice by putting it on 1.7 V and see how long it lasts.
I should get that project going...
i'm not sure if i'm right, but basically the more amd tweaks a core for higher mhz, the higher the temps tend to be, and the less voltage it can take reliably.Quote:
Originally Posted by s7e9h3n
someone who knows their microE better than myself can explain better :p:
1.65V is as high as I go. OK, maybe 1.7V for 24/7 as long as the temperatures are at bay.
Yeah, like me. :stick:Quote:
Originally Posted by ozzimark
just pop the ihs off and its gonna be alrightQuote:
Originally Posted by Martin Cracauer
I ran my X2 4400+ at 1.73V all yesterday, despite that people constantly say X2 may die at anything above 1.6V, but it's fine. Nothing I would recommend for long term usage though.
-k0nsl
Quote:
Originally Posted by afireinside
I think that's true. My San Diego 3700+ doesn't even boot at more than 1.87v, and my winnie 3500+ died at 2.03vQuote:
Originally Posted by s7e9h3n