***Asus Rampage III Extreme Owners Thread***

Quote:

Originally Posted by DuraN

Seeing as people are actually using 0702 I would assume it is pretty safe. Let's not jump to conclusions just because one user had a bad flash :)

yes, you are right :) It can happen to anyone. It's always a risk.
the second attempt ............. :):ROTF:
http://img231.imageshack.us/img231/705/mainboardk.jpg
I have several profiles: from 3.8GHz - 4.3GHz

Quote:

Originally Posted by jacek

yes, you are right :) It can happen to anyone. It's always a risk.
the second attempt ............. :):ROTF:
http://img231.imageshack.us/img231/705/mainboardk.jpg
I have several profiles: from 3.8GHz - 4.3GHz

what ram are you using in your rig? i hope its not my ram stopping me from acheiving decent clocks.

I try again in a few hours for a 4.2ghz stable.

currently I have G.skill trident 2000 cl9.

Quote:

Originally Posted by jacek

currently I have G.skill trident 2000 cl9.

ofcourse sorry i didnt read your signature.

Im using also G.Skill Trident, 9-9-9-24 @ 1.65v

care to share your 4.2ghz settings see if i can run stable?

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ghostleader

Here´s the 0702 beta for those who want it, I have added it in the OP also.

Thank! :up:

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jeff Flowerday

To get lower numbers:

Disable C1E
Disable all C State
Disable Turbo
Some say to disable speedstep, but I notice no change on doing that. Plus I don't like my CPU being pinned 24/7

Ultimately to get it lower you need to disable HPET (High Precision Event Timer), but Asus doesn't give us that option. Though I've read that disabling ACPI 2.0 support is the equivalent on a Asus board, but from the description I doubt that.

If you don't mind, disable ACPI 2.0 support and see if that does anything for the numbers.

Again, I really appreciate your time on this. I don't want to spend $400 CDN and not know exactly what I'm getting into.

I'll try all of that and report. It's not a trouble, I like experimenting. :D Sorry for not doing this quicker, but I was busy, I just got home.

1 Attachment(s)

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jeff Flowerday

If someone has a minute or two could you please run DPC Latency checker and report the results. I'm looking at the board to handle my crossfire gaming but I also use it as a DAW.

http://www.thesycon.de/deu/latency_check.shtml

Thanks in advance,
Jeff

Hope this helps, 2nd report using DPC Lat

kortas

sure,
bclk=200, ram 2000, uncore= auto
Try increasing your QPI/VTT a little. You can try about 1.4-1.5V. Set timings manually to 9-9-9-24.
DRAM TIMING MOD=3N, the rest on auto.
DRAM VOLTAGE = 1.6
other voltages - auto.
btw
http://img580.imageshack.us/img580/9...tridentr3e.jpg

kullymontana: The sensors that Intel uses on their CPUs have never been very accurate at reporting idle temperatures and things are probably worse on the new 32nm Core i7-980X, especially when individual cores can go to sleep with little to no power being used for some cores. Accurate idle temperature monitoring is not what Intel designed these sensors for. They were only designed to control thermal throttling and thermal shutdown and for that purpose, they work great.

Comparing two different programs that read totally different sensors is pointless, especially when none of the sensors are calibrated. What's your water temperature near your CPU? The core sensor reading 28C in your picture might be close to the truth.

NathObeaN: I like your style. Your computer is not Prime stable so instead of fixing the problem, you decide it is easier to slag Prime95. Then you're bashing RealTemp and other programs that you know nothing about.

Core temperatures of Intel CPUs can change instantaneously. No two programs are going to be reading the sensors at the exact same time so when lightly loaded, you will see different programs report different temperatures. That doesn't prove anything or mean one program is bad and one is good. When lightly loaded, it usually doesn't mean anything.

The best way to compare the accuracy of core temperature monitoring programs is to run a consistent load like Prime 95 - Small FFTs on each thread and then give the CPU 5 or 10 minutes to stabilize and then you can post a screen shot to show us all these differences you are seeing.

On the newer Core i CPUs, TJMax is written into a register for each core and the temperature sensor data is written into another core. On these CPUs, RealTemp and Core Temp are reading the exact same registers and should be reporting the exact same thing.

Core Temp has also just started using the Intel recommended method to report the multiplier accurately just like RealTemp does. You can download his latest beta here for your comparison:

http://www.xtremesystems.org/forums/...&postcount=488

Some of the other programs you mentioned do not bother reading all 4 cores of a Core i7. One program sometimes only reads 2 of the 4 cores and pretends that it is reading all 4 cores. Maybe when you are testing you will be able to determine what program is doing that.

SkOrPn: CPU-Z has a problem with accurately reporting the multiplier when a Core i CPU is lightly loaded. You might want to try adjusting your C-States as well as the Minimum processor state in the Control Panel -> Power Options to see what's really going on. I know NathObeaN thinks RealTemp is a piece of crap but the multiplier it displays is extremely accurate at idle because it uses the method that Intel recommends in their November 2008 Turbo White Paper. Unlike NathObeanN, the programmer of Core Temp and I actually read junk like that. Don't be afraid to trust what it is telling you or what the latest beta version of CoreTemp is telling you.

Quote:

Originally Posted by unclewebb

NathObeaN: I like your style. Your computer is not Prime stable so instead of fixing the problem, you decide it is easier to slag Prime95. Then you're bashing RealTemp and other programs that you know nothing about.

Core temperatures of Intel CPUs can change instantaneously. No two programs are going to be reading the sensors at the exact same time so when lightly loaded, you will see different programs report different temperatures. That doesn't prove anything or mean one program is bad and one is good. When lightly loaded, it usually doesn't mean anything.

What the hell?

I was slagging Prime95?

Quote:

Originally Posted by NathObeaN

By the way everyone, how reliable is Prime95?

I have been reading the Prime95 forums and it seems that Prime95 can get errors naturally... as the whole idea of it is to use a very complex maths to find the Mersenne primes.

I also wonder the same thing because I can run LinX for hours, which is supposed to be a better stress tester and not have any errors, yet with Prime95 I can get random errors...

Just makes me wonder because we all rely on programs such as Prime95, but couldn't an error occur simply because the application encounted a natural bug...?

Exactly when do I slag Prime95? I simply asked if it is truly reliable as errors can occur with the application even if there isn't a hardware problem.

and... "bashing Real Temp", seriously, I merely pointed out that in comparison to 3 other applications, it is the ONLY one that reports temperatures differently and the ONLY one that doesn't seem to line up with BIOS temperatures - wow I am really bashing Real Temp - I'm just stating a fact, calm down. Not to mention the fact I never even said anything about idle/load temperatures. For idle temperatures none of them are "stable" as the readings are quite sporadic.

I don't know whether you have had a bad day or something but don't quote me and have a go at me for something that I never even did.

EDIT:

Funny how when I download the Real Temp 3.59 BETA the temps are perfectly in line with all the other applications. So the current 3.40 on TechPowerUp obviously needed updating :rolleyes:.

1 Attachment(s)

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jeff Flowerday

To get lower numbers:

Disable C1E
Disable all C State
Disable Turbo
Some say to disable speedstep, but I notice no change on doing that. Plus I don't like my CPU being pinned 24/7

Ultimately to get it lower you need to disable HPET (High Precision Event Timer), but Asus doesn't give us that option. Though I've read that disabling ACPI 2.0 support is the equivalent on a Asus board, but from the description I doubt that.

If you don't mind, disable ACPI 2.0 support and see if that does anything for the numbers.

Again, I really appreciate your time on this. I don't want to spend $400 CDN and not know exactly what I'm getting into.

Here is an attempt with C1E disabled, CxE disabled, EIST disabled (just to be sure lower multi doesn't affect it) and ACPI 2.0 enabled/disabled (makes no difference)

Do you guys know if increasing the qpi/dram voltage beyond 1.4v degrades these chips.. While on LN2 I could reach 6ghz and my settings for dram bus voltage were 1.80v and for the qpi/dram voltage I set to 1.55v.. Then I did another session and I'm getting bsod's and it seems like the chip is already worn down.. My max bclk so far is 250. Can anyone confirm that the qpi / dram voltage is bad beyond 1.4v? Thanks so much!! :)

Quote:

Originally Posted by NathObeaN

What the hell?

I was slagging Prime95?

Exactly when do I slag Prime95? I simply asked if it is truly reliable as errors can occur with the application even if there isn't a hardware problem.

and... "bashing Real Temp", seriously, I merely pointed out that in comparison to 3 other applications, it is the ONLY one that reports temperatures differently and the ONLY one that doesn't seem to line up with BIOS temperatures - wow I am really bashing Real Temp - I'm just stating a fact, calm down. Not to mention the fact I never even said anything about idle/load temperatures. For idle temperatures none of them are "stable" as the readings are quite sporadic.

I don't know whether you have had a bad day or something but don't quote me and have a go at me for something that I never even did.

Quote:

Originally Posted by NathObeaN

I had the same problem - varied CPU temps accross aps.

First off, I wouldn't use Real Temp. I have used CoreTemp, Everest and HWMonitor and then compared it to the BIOS temps/volts and they seem to be quite reliable applications.

CPU-Z and HWMonitor (by the same people) gives bad voltage readings, it seems to use some kind of average, and doesn't update often. Everest however seems to match the BIOS and updates every second.

For temperatues, Everest, CoreTemp and HWMonitor all give rougly the same temperatures. Real Temp on the other hand tends to give about 2-3C more than every other application.

And this of course.

just so you know bios temps are not the same temps that realtemp sensors read/show.but the highlighed part does seem like your implying that realtemp isnt any good?

Quote:

Originally Posted by radaja

just so you know bios temps are not the same temps that realtemp sensors read/show.but the highlighed part does seem like your implying that realtemp isnt any good?

The only bit that implies anything is "I wouldn't use Real Temp". Am I not allowed to give my own personal opinion?

I have also just downloaded the BETA 3.59 of Real Temp which is perfectly in line with Core Temp 0.99.6.3. The official version currently on TechPowerUp however, gave results of about 2-3C higher than Core Temp.

Obviously I am not delusional as the latest update seems to have rectified the "problem".

On another note though, I hardly see how saying "I wouldn't use Real Temp" is "bashing" it. A lot of people would say I wouldn't use Windows 7, doesn't mean they are "bashing it" they just might prefer OSX or Linux.

Can't seem to understand how to set my IOH voltage ...when I set it to auto, its at 1.16v? But I think its not enough. I have a HD 5850 and I'll have another one this week, I want to overclock both...

Here is my Extreme tweaker settings and tell me what I should change...( I get constant BSOD if I dont put timings mode at 3N)

Code:

Target CPU Frequency 4294MHz Target DRAM Frequency 1636MHz LN2 Mode [No]*** QPI Loadline Calibration [Yes]*** Sync Mode [Enabled] AI Overclock Tuner [Manual] OC From CPU level Up [Auto] CPU Ratio Setting [21] CPU Turbo Power Limit [Disabled] >CPU Configuration---------------------------- CPU Ratio Setting [21] C1E Support [Disabled] Hardware Prefetcher [Enabled] Adjacent Cache Line Prefetcher [Enabled] Intel(R) Virtualiyation Tech [Enabled] CPU TM Function [Disabled] Execute Disable Bit [Disabled] Intel(R) HT Technology [Enabled] Active Processor Cores [*ALL] A20M [Disabled] Intel(R) SpeedStep(TM) Tech [Disabled] Intel(R) C-STATE Tech [Disabled] C State package limit setting [Auto] ---------------------------------------------- BCLK Frequency [204] PCIE Frequency [102] DRAM Frequency [1636] UCLK Frequency [3690] QPI Link Data Rate [Auto] Memory Configuration Protect [Disabled] >DRAM Timing Control-------------------------- CAS# Latency [8] RAS# to CAS# Delay [8] RAS# PRE Time [8] RAS# ACT Time [20] RAS# to RAS# Delay [Auto] REF Cycle Time [Auto] WRITE Recovery Time [Auto] READ to PRE Time [Auto] FOUR ACT WIN Time [Auto] Back-To-BackCAS# Delay [Auto] Timing Mode [3N] Round Trip Latency on CHA [Auto] Round Trip Latency on CHB [Auto] Round Trip Latency on CHC [Auto] WRITE To READ Delay(DD) [Auto] WRITE To READ Delay(DR) [Auto] WRITE To READ Delay(SR) [Auto] READ To WRITE Delay(DD) [Auto] READ To WRITE Delay(DR) [Auto] READ To WRITE Delay(SR) [Auto] READ To READ Delay(DD) [Auto] READ To READ Delay(DR) [Auto] READ To READ Delay(SR) [Auto] WRITE To WRITE Delay(DD) [Auto] WRITE To WRITE Delay(DR) [Auto] WRITE To WRITE Delay(SR) [Auto] ---------------------------------------------- CPU Differential Amplitude [Auto] CPU Clock Skew [Auto] IOH Clock Skew [Auto] ------------ Extreme Engine Digi+ ------------ Digi+ PWR Mode [T-Balanced] PWR Volt. Control [Auto] Load-Line Calibration [Auto] CPU Voltege OCP [Enabled] CPU PWM Frequency [Auto] Extreme OV [Disabled] Extreme OC [Disabled] CPU Voltage [1.3375v] CPU PLL Voltage [1.84175v] QPI/DRAM Core Voltage [1.300v] DRAM Bus Voltage [1.643v] >DRAM REF Voltages---------------------------- DRAM DATA REF Voltage on CHA [Auto] DRAM CTRL REF Voltage on CHA [Auto] DRAM DATA REF Voltage on CHB [Auto] DRAM CTRL REF Voltage on CHB [Auto] DRAM DATA REF Voltage on CHC [Auto] DRAM CTRL REF Voltage on CHC [Auto] ---------------------------------------------- IOH Voltage [1.19291v] IOH PCIE Voltage [1.52431v] ICH Voltage [1.12666v] ICH PCIE Voltage [1.52431v] ---------- Spread Spectrum Control ----------- CPU Spread Spectrum [Disabled] DRAM Spread Spectrum [Disabled] ***on-board jumper dependant

everything is stable for 2 hours Linx stable...need to tweak a couple of Value...but the Metro 2033 Keep crashing when I play, and 3d mark Vantage also gives me some annoying vertical line before freezing like Metro 2033

Thanks Guys

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bodar

Do you guys know if increasing the qpi/dram voltage beyond 1.4v degrades these chips.. While on LN2 I could reach 6ghz and my settings for dram bus voltage were 1.80v and for the qpi/dram voltage I set to 1.55v.. Then I did another session and I'm getting bsod's and it seems like the chip is already worn down.. My max bclk so far is 250. Can anyone confirm that the qpi / dram voltage is bad beyond 1.4v? Thanks so much!! :)

these chips require less voltage on cold
i try to keep below 1.5 for 24/7 but 1.6 dont scare me

I prefer to use Real Temp for trusted monitoring, but I also like Core Temp because it has a Desktop Gadget. Both seem to give me identical readings.

Quote:

Originally Posted by NathObeaN

The only bit that implies anything is "I wouldn't use Real Temp". Am I not allowed to give my own personal opinion?

I have also just downloaded the BETA 3.59 of Real Temp which is perfectly in line with Core Temp 0.99.6.3. The official version currently on TechPowerUp however, gave results of about 2-3C higher than Core Temp.

Obviously I am not delusional as the latest update seems to have rectified the "problem".

On another note though, I hardly see how saying "I wouldn't use Real Temp" is "bashing" it. A lot of people would say I wouldn't use Windows 7, doesn't mean they are "bashing it" they just might prefer OSX or Linux.

no big deal but the part i meant about implying something about realtemp was this part.

Quote:

they seem to be quite reliable applications.

as if real temp isnt reliable compared to the others,thats sort of implying realtemp is some unreliable junk.and yet you made these statements(your opinion)and wasnt even running the latest release.you should always run the latest releases,especially if your having problems.

if you have overclocking problems reseat cpu

Quote:

Originally Posted by zsamz_

these chips require less voltage on cold
i try to keep below 1.5 for 24/7 but 1.6 dont scare me

Thanks so much for the quick response.. I feel like this new ES 980x could do over 6ghz pretty easy.. I raised the api/dram voltage to 1.55v and the dram bus voltage to 1.85v and now I'm getting more bsod's.. I think it may be the chip.. Hope I did'nt f something up.. Thanks again!

These are the settings I used to get around 6ghz.... Did I mess something up.. Cpu was -140c and no CB. Thanks!

Code:

LN2 Mode [yes]*** QPI Loadline Calibration [Yes]*** Sync Mode [disabled] AI Overclock Tuner [Manual] OC From CPU level Up [Auto] CPU Ratio Setting [35] CPU Turbo Power Limit [Disabled] >CPU Configuration---------------------------- CPU Ratio Setting [35] C1E Support [Disabled] Hardware Prefetcher [Enabled] Adjacent Cache Line Prefetcher [Enabled] Intel(R) Virtualiyation Tech [disabled] CPU TM Function [Disabled] Execute Disable Bit [Disabled] Intel(R) HT Technology [Enabled] Active Processor Cores [*ALL] A20M [Disabled] Intel(R) SpeedStep(TM) Tech [Disabled] Intel(R) C-STATE Tech [Disabled] C State package limit setting [Auto] ---------------------------------------------- PCIE Frequency [113] Memory Configuration Protect [Disabled] >DRAM Timing Control-------------------------- CAS# Latency [8] RAS# to CAS# Delay [8] RAS# PRE Time [8] RAS# ACT Time [21] RAS# to RAS# Delay [Auto] REF Cycle Time [88] WRITE Recovery Time [Auto] READ to PRE Time [Auto] FOUR ACT WIN Time [Auto] Back-To-BackCAS# Delay [Auto] Timing Mode [3N] Round Trip Latency on CHA [Auto] Round Trip Latency on CHB [Auto] Round Trip Latency on CHC [Auto] WRITE To READ Delay(DD) [Auto] WRITE To READ Delay(DR) [Auto] WRITE To READ Delay(SR) [Auto] READ To WRITE Delay(DD) [Auto] READ To WRITE Delay(DR) [Auto] READ To WRITE Delay(SR) [Auto] READ To READ Delay(DD) [Auto] READ To READ Delay(DR) [Auto] READ To READ Delay(SR) [Auto] WRITE To WRITE Delay(DD) [Auto] WRITE To WRITE Delay(DR) [Auto] WRITE To WRITE Delay(SR) [Auto] ---------------------------------------------- CPU Differential Amplitude [1000mv] CPU Clock Skew [Auto] IOH Clock Skew [Auto] ------------ Extreme Engine Digi+ ------------ Digi+ PWR Mode [x-power] PWR Volt. Control [10] Load-Line Calibration [full] CPU Voltege OCP [disabled] CPU PWM Frequency [1000khz] Extreme OV [enabled] CPU Voltage [1.825v] CPU PLL Voltage [1.90v] QPI/DRAM Core Voltage [1.55v] DRAM Bus Voltage [1.81v] >DRAM REF Voltages---------------------------- DRAM DATA REF Voltage on CHA [Auto] DRAM CTRL REF Voltage on CHA [Auto] DRAM DATA REF Voltage on CHB [Auto] DRAM CTRL REF Voltage on CHB [Auto] DRAM DATA REF Voltage on CHC [Auto] DRAM CTRL REF Voltage on CHC [Auto] ---------------------------------------------- IOH Voltage [1.35v] IOH PCIE Voltage [1.58v] ICH Voltage [1.15v] ICH PCIE Voltage [1.55] ---------- Spread Spectrum Control ----------- CPU Spread Spectrum [Disabled] DRAM Spread Spectrum [Disabled] ***on-board jumper dependant

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bodar

Thanks so much for the quick response.. I feel like this new ES 980x could do over 6ghz pretty easy.. I raised the api/dram voltage to 1.55v and the dram bus voltage to 1.85v and now I'm getting more bsod's.. I think it may be the chip.. Hope I did'nt f something up.. Thanks again!

be carefull with es 980x they tend to die
and you got no warranty;)

Best 980x

Quote:

Originally Posted by zsamz_

be carefull with es 980x they tend to die
and you got no warranty;)

Hi Guys, new to the forum, and I have enjoyed reading. I'm still waiting for my riiie to arrive but I would just like to ask then, what is the best 980x.

Thanks,

Guys.

Welcome hodgy1971,by best 980x do you mean best batch?
if so this is what the database that zalbard has put together
looks like so far.

Code:

Full Batch # | Frequency and # of cores + threads | vCore | Motherboard | Cooling type LinX / Prime, Stability # 3003A957 | Core i7 980X [6C 12T] @ 4600.4MHz | 1.472 | ASUS P6T Deluxe V2 | Water # 3003A957 | Core i7 980X [6C 12T] @ 4231.9MHz | 1.344 | ASUS P6T | Water # 3003B287 | Core i7 980X [6C 6T] @ 4800.3MHz | 1.520 | Gigabyte X58A-UD7 | Chilled Water # 3003B287 | Core i7 980X [6C 12T] @ 4725.4MHz | 1.568 | Gigabyte X58A-UD7 | Water # 3003B287 | Core i7 980X [6C 12T] @ 4608.7MHz | 1.458 | EVGA Classified e760 | Water # 3003B288 | Core i7 980X [6C 6T] @ 4500.2MHz | 1.408V | ASUS P6X58D Premium | Water # 3003B320 | Core i7 980X [6C 12T] @ 4713.7MHz | 1.494 | EVGA Classified e759 | Water # 3003B396 | Core i7 980X [6C 12T] @ 4563.9MHz | 1.435 | EVGA Classified e760 | Water # 3003B396 | Core i7 980X [6C 12T] @ 4521.5MHz | 1.424 | Gigabyte X58A-UD7 | Water # 3003B396 | Core i7 980X [6C 12T] @ 4500.2MHz | 1.376 | Gigabyte X58-DS4 | Water # 3003B475 | Core i7 980X [6C 12T] @ 4504.9MHz | 1.442 | ASUS Rampage II Extreme | Water ___________ LN2, Validations # 3003B287 | Core i7 980X [6C 12T] @ 6612.4MHz | 1.872 | EVGA Classified e762 # 3003B287 | Core i7 980X [6C 12T] @ 6320.5MHz | 1.823 | EVGA Classified e762 ___________ LN2, SPi 1M # 3003A957 | Core i7 980X [6C 6T] @ 6188.8MHz | 1.929 | EVGA Classified e762 # 3003B242 | Core i7 980X [6C 12T] @ 6053.3MHz | 1.846 | EVGA Classified e762 # 3003B331 | Core i7 980X [2C 2T] @ 5869.0MHz | 1.904 | Gigabyte X58-UD4 # 3952A844 | Core i7 980X [6C 6T] @ 5906.2MHz | 1.888 | Gigabyte X58A-UD7 ___________ LN2, 3DMark Vantage # 3003A957 | Core i7 980X [6C 12T] @ 5859.7MHz | 1.846 | EVGA Classified e760 # 3003B178 | Core i7 980X [6C 12T] @ 5506.1MHz | 1.760 | Gigabyte X58A-UD7 # 3003B187 | Core i7 980X [6C 12T] @ 5713.9MHz | 1.729 | EVGA Classified e762 # 3003B331 | Core i7 980X [6C 12T] @ 5566.7MHz | 1.835 | EVGA Classified e760 # 3003B396 | Core i7 980X [6C 12T] @ 5821.5MHz | 1.824 | ASUS Rampage III Extreme # 3952A844 | Core i7 980X [6C 12T] @ 5405.2MHz | 1.872 | ASUS Rampage II Extreme ___________ LN2, AquaMark 3 # 3003B320 | Core i7 980X [6C 6T] @ 6325.4MHz | 1.928 | ASUS P6T WS Pro

heres a link to his thread
Official Intel Gulftown (Westmere) Overclocking and Batch Tracking Thread

so be sure to post your result in the thread to add to the database

Quote:

Originally Posted by radaja

Welcome hodgy1971,by best 980x do you mean best batch?
if so this is what the database that zalbard has put together
looks like so far.

Code:

Full Batch # | Frequency and # of cores + threads | vCore | Motherboard | Cooling type LinX / Prime, Stability # 3003A957 | Core i7 980X [6C 12T] @ 4600.4MHz | 1.472 | ASUS P6T Deluxe V2 | Water # 3003A957 | Core i7 980X [6C 12T] @ 4231.9MHz | 1.344 | ASUS P6T | Water # 3003B287 | Core i7 980X [6C 6T] @ 4800.3MHz | 1.520 | Gigabyte X58A-UD7 | Chilled Water # 3003B287 | Core i7 980X [6C 12T] @ 4725.4MHz | 1.568 | Gigabyte X58A-UD7 | Water # 3003B287 | Core i7 980X [6C 12T] @ 4608.7MHz | 1.458 | EVGA Classified e760 | Water # 3003B288 | Core i7 980X [6C 6T] @ 4500.2MHz | 1.408V | ASUS P6X58D Premium | Water # 3003B320 | Core i7 980X [6C 12T] @ 4713.7MHz | 1.494 | EVGA Classified e759 | Water # 3003B396 | Core i7 980X [6C 12T] @ 4563.9MHz | 1.435 | EVGA Classified e760 | Water # 3003B396 | Core i7 980X [6C 12T] @ 4521.5MHz | 1.424 | Gigabyte X58A-UD7 | Water # 3003B396 | Core i7 980X [6C 12T] @ 4500.2MHz | 1.376 | Gigabyte X58-DS4 | Water # 3003B475 | Core i7 980X [6C 12T] @ 4504.9MHz | 1.442 | ASUS Rampage II Extreme | Water ___________ LN2, Validations # 3003B287 | Core i7 980X [6C 12T] @ 6612.4MHz | 1.872 | EVGA Classified e762 # 3003B287 | Core i7 980X [6C 12T] @ 6320.5MHz | 1.823 | EVGA Classified e762 ___________ LN2, SPi 1M # 3003A957 | Core i7 980X [6C 6T] @ 6188.8MHz | 1.929 | EVGA Classified e762 # 3003B242 | Core i7 980X [6C 12T] @ 6053.3MHz | 1.846 | EVGA Classified e762 # 3003B331 | Core i7 980X [2C 2T] @ 5869.0MHz | 1.904 | Gigabyte X58-UD4 # 3952A844 | Core i7 980X [6C 6T] @ 5906.2MHz | 1.888 | Gigabyte X58A-UD7 ___________ LN2, 3DMark Vantage # 3003A957 | Core i7 980X [6C 12T] @ 5859.7MHz | 1.846 | EVGA Classified e760 # 3003B178 | Core i7 980X [6C 12T] @ 5506.1MHz | 1.760 | Gigabyte X58A-UD7 # 3003B187 | Core i7 980X [6C 12T] @ 5713.9MHz | 1.729 | EVGA Classified e762 # 3003B331 | Core i7 980X [6C 12T] @ 5566.7MHz | 1.835 | EVGA Classified e760 # 3003B396 | Core i7 980X [6C 12T] @ 5821.5MHz | 1.824 | ASUS Rampage III Extreme # 3952A844 | Core i7 980X [6C 12T] @ 5405.2MHz | 1.872 | ASUS Rampage II Extreme ___________ LN2, AquaMark 3 # 3003B320 | Core i7 980X [6C 6T] @ 6325.4MHz | 1.928 | ASUS P6T WS Pro

heres a link to his thread
Official Intel Gulftown (Westmere) Overclocking and Batch Tracking Thread

so be sure to post your result in the thread to add to the database

Not a single F batch in the list??

Are they that new?

Quote:

Originally Posted by turtletrax

Not a single F batch in the list??

Are they that new?

:yepp: they new