Nehalem Overclocking @ XS

Update

Quote:

---

Voltages

vcore ~1.5v, this is a "leaky" high IDV chip, scaling up with higher voltage is possible at a cost of runaway amp phenomena.
vmem ~2.2v for benching 2v on Vapo, compensate voltage with cooling to be safe.
vqpi ~1.35v depending on the board/bclock, upwards of 1.55v if I am pushing bclock, I run a low bclock so I usually leave it on stock.
vmem is the secret to uclk, 2.2v gets you 4.7Ghz ulck. uclk is also known as uncore.

general ratios

Stock QPI on i7 965 is x48 @ 133 bclock, if you raise the bclock to 160ish you would need to drop qpi ratio to X44 to continue raising the bclock to 180ish, drop qpi again to X36 again and that will get you out the theoretic max bclock of 220. That is not set in stone, some chips/board combos have exceeded these numbers but this rule is pretty close to what you will see on C stepping.

The uclk ratio I prefer to use is (the lowest possible) 1:2 of my ram speed (uclk runs at twice the speed of memory) and at lower speeds there are plenty more ratios to scale higher without running the sick memory speeds that I do, this is a huge gain in performance but for me it requires a lot of vmem and high end memory to run upwards of 2300Mhz (4700Mhz uclk) the memory controller has exceptional is its stability at this speed, I have not reached top speed and it will take even faster ram and more vmem to achieve that.

Runaway amp phenomena, I hook an amp meter to the four yellow wires on eight pin power cable that connects near the CPU. Watching this you will see that yes you can keep scaling up with more voltage but your chip has a limit with all cores loaded that it will runaway on amps till it crashes. I know exactly what range to stay in with cores loaded to know not to hit this runaway threshold. Keeping vcore down and disabling HT lets me run at the chips max speed, HT has an added power load on the CPU, disabling it helps gain critical Mhz.

---

good info charles

let us know when Intel figures out what causes runaway amps
this is something that needs to be metered it seems

will have to get a meter
if you could link to the one you use it would be handy for members here

good insight into OCing in general
i'll make sure to go over it when i finally start my testing soon :up:

without having measured it i know exactly what you mean about vcore being too much
im still working with my better chip to find the right volts to get highest clock without crashing when i high load hits.

uncore is really handy for PI efficiency ;)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by T_M

Note sure if you can say its improvement, but here's my result from last night with only an Intel SSD (no iRams etc):

http://www.hwbot.org/result.do?resultId=792285

---

Would be helpful if I had a compare URL so I could see where exactly Core i7 is showing improvements. I suspect though the only improvement you will see will be in the last multi-threaded test with a large storage array. The memory access at 19.x MA/s is impressive and the extra available CPU threads for the actual HDD accessing will help the virus scan score. PCM05 only scales to 4 threads I believe so those 4 HT cores will sit idle or help with background stuff like accessing the HDD array.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by FUGGER

Runaway amp phenomena, I hook an amp meter to the four yellow wires on eight pin power cable that connects near the CPU. Watching this you will see that yes you can keep scaling up with more voltage but your chip has a limit with all cores loaded that it will runaway on amps till it crashes. I know exactly what range to stay in with cores loaded to know not to hit this runaway threshold. Keeping vcore down and disabling HT lets me run at the chips max speed, HT has an added power load on the CPU, disabling it helps gain critical Mhz.

---

Hmm, what method are you using to measure the current? Cutting the wires and adding multimeter in series or clip-on ammeter like this http://www.hotektech.com/GMCMetraclip70.htm from one of the yellow wires or from all the yellow wires? What kind of values you see? And what value is the limit (runaway threshold) when cores are loaded? Is it some Intel spec or experimentally figured value? Thanks :)

edit: looks like you can use LTS 25-NP current sensor:

http://www.silentpcreview.com/article313-page4.html

Product page: http://www.lemusa.com/hq/en/componen...0.37.19.000.0/

My i7 920, VID : 0.975 ;)

http://www.abload.de/thumb/0.944vsue6.jpg

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Sampsa

Hmm, what method are you using to measure the current? Cutting the wires and adding multimeter in series or clip-on ammeter like this http://www.hotektech.com/GMCMetraclip70.htm from one of the yellow wires or from all the yellow wires? What kind of values you see? And what value is the limit (runaway threshold) when cores are loaded? Is it some Intel spec or experimentally figured value? Thanks :)

edit: looks like you can use LTS 25-NP current sensor:

http://www.silentpcreview.com/article313-page4.html

Product page: http://www.lemusa.com/hq/en/componen...0.37.19.000.0/

---

he doesnt do any modding/cutting

just a cheap clip on meter

Are we positive the CPU pulls all it's power only from the 12v line? No power is drawn from the 24 pin ATX connector or is it "negligible"?

edit: we know the CPU pulls power from the 24-pin connector, these boards will run without the 12v line plugged in :)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by slash777

My i7 920, VID : 0.975 ;)

---

Something special there? My E8600 will run with similar vcore and it's been abused to no end :confused:

Thanks Fugger for the post on "Runaway Amp Phenomena". I learned something new today. :up:

huh ............ 24 k of memory bandwidth are u kidding ???????.
Congrats on those results , i hope that core i7 will be available here soon , i need to do some benchies , i am tired from LGA 775:-)

Here is a pic of the amp meter attached to the 12v lines.

This is an example of where to attach, do not purchase model shown.

Fugger was runaway amps only on Gigabyte board or other brands ? could it be related to Gigabyte X58's voltage controller/load line calibration not working and needing Gigabyte to revise the board ??

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by eva2000

Fugger was runaway amps only on Gigabyte board or other brands ? could it be related to Gigabyte X58's voltage controller/load line calibration not working and needing Gigabyte to revise the board ??

---

i hope the ud5 is a good board ? i just bought one :shrug:

New toy, watercooled on P6T deluxe:

http://img74.imageshack.us/img74/786...9078ua9.th.jpghttp://img74.imageshack.us/images/thpix.gif

http://img153.imageshack.us/img153/7...6803of2.th.jpghttp://img153.imageshack.us/images/thpix.gif

http://img359.imageshack.us/img359/4...7919ao1.th.jpghttp://img359.imageshack.us/images/thpix.gif

http://img74.imageshack.us/img74/176...8276fp7.th.jpghttp://img74.imageshack.us/images/thpix.gif

All boards, first seen on Smackover day one.

More feedback from people, we will probably see the F1 pot being able to run into higher amps than cascade.

It would be good to know what others are peaking at.

Unfortunately i dont have one of those puppies, so anyone else?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by T_M

Unfortunately i dont have one of those puppies, so anyone else?

---

I'll go check local stores today if I can find clamp-on current meter, should get new 965 chip to play with tomorrow and LN2 on friday :up:

My local shop had this for 100 euros:

http://www.multimeterwarehouse.com/clamp/MS2108A.jpg

http://www.multimeterwarehouse.com/MS2108.htm

They need to order it so it will take couple of days. Should do the job right?

It should be ok. 0.1A intervall should be good enough atleast to see how the trend is.

Nice function that "clamp on frequency function". I have never seen that before. :) Another good function is capacitance measuring. However, i am not sure if it has that as it is not mentioned in the detailed specification... Peak function might get usefull aswell.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Sampsa

My local shop had this for 100 euros:

http://www.multimeterwarehouse.com/clamp/MS2108A.jpg

http://www.multimeterwarehouse.com/MS2108.htm

They need to order it so it will take couple of days. Should do the job right?

---

woahhh I think I can get one for 10 euros with lesser bling :D

ahaha, the other day I accidentally bought an hvac clamp meter, now i find out it'll come in handy!

might this 'runaway amp' phenomenon be related to the new power shifting algorithims?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by FUGGER

Runaway amp phenomena, I hook an amp meter to the four yellow wires on eight pin power cable that connects near the CPU. Watching this you will see that yes you can keep scaling up with more voltage but your chip has a limit with all cores loaded that it will runaway on amps till it crashes.

---

What average amperage are you seeing before runaway happens?

Aren't that clamp meters only AC? AFAIK they able to measure only AC currents, not DC +12V.

"AC/DC Clamp Meter"

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by TiN_EOF

Aren't that clamp meters only AC? AFAIK they able to measure only AC currents, not DC +12V.

---

There are models which support only AC, but also models supporting both AC/DC.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by LardArse

woahhh I think I can get one for 10 euros with lesser bling :D

---

damn you guys
everything is cheap there :p:
bloody LN2 is almost free, not to mention all the other stuff....if it wasnt so humid maybe it would be a nice place to move to hahahah

I got mine from http://www.conrad.com/ for 30 Euros.
they ship to several European countries, im not sure if they ship out of the EU.

good early bloomfield oc-results fugger, good work. finite u will get such results with an amd deneb too with ln2 of course....;)

Why doesn't anyone admit that there is a high voltage cold bug with these cpus? Anyone who's benched them cold should know.

ok sham eye believe ya .... but it's going to take a while for me to try lol

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by LardArse

Why doesn't anyone admit that there is a high voltage cold bug with these cpus? Anyone who's benched them cold should know.

---

Hey, it was cold in my office when I benched..
I took the room down to 68F from 72F..:rofl:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Movieman

Hey, it was cold in my office when I benched..
I took the room down to 68F from 72F..:rofl:

---

ROFL :rofl:
That's still hot m8 :D

p.s. Glad to see you're back Dave ;)

Either I am blind or the information about this runaway amp thing is not in this thread. How does it show practically?

I just finished my X58 roundup. I tested for max BCLK and measured CPU and memory voltage idle and load. Didnt notice anything suspicious, but when I used the 965 for WCG, it didnt produce a single wrong calculation for 16 hours then suddenly restarted, which is pretty odd as temps were even lower than the day before.

Surprisingly the MSI and Biostar board git the highest BCLK. Biostar up to 222 MHz for 1M, 218 MHz Prime 95. MSI hit 220 MHz Prime stable and 1M stable at the same speed. Asus boards were close. 215 MHz stable, 218 MHz 1M, Rampage II Extreme being slightly worse than P6T. Intel board sucked big time: 185 MHz 1M and 180 MHz Prime. The Gigabyte board refused to boot after making any changes in the BIOS with the 965, while it ran fine on 920. Bad sample I guess, didnt do any further testing.

I cant remember the performance numbers, but P6T was fastest on 32M. 1M was close on all boards. The Biostar was pretty fast for 3D, so was the RIIE.

What about the Evga X58, was that part of your tests?

No, the EVGA is not ready yet, afaik.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Fr3ak

Either I am blind or the information about this runaway amp thing is not in this thread. How does it show practically?

---

No you are not blind, I'm also hoping for some more information regarding this subject. In my tests I have measured 17,8A from ATX +12V yellow wires when CPU-test ran ok @ 4,644 GHz. Sometimes system crashed @ 16,3A. How can we benefit in overclocking observing the amps?

Seems like 3DMark Vantage's GT1 and GT2 are drawing very little power from PSU (4,5 GHz run):

http://plaza.fi/s/f/editor/images/965_2_02.jpg

12,14V * 3,8A = 46,132W

Then CPU-test 1:

http://plaza.fi/s/f/editor/images/965_2_03.jpg
12,07V * 16,8A = 202,776A

There is no time to react with ESC key and stop the CPU-test when system freezes and amps drop from ~17A to 6,8A or something.

FUGGER? Dr Who?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by FUGGER

Update:

The uclk ratio I prefer to use is (the lowest possible) 1:2 of my ram speed (uclk runs at twice the speed of memory) and at lower speeds there are plenty more ratios to scale higher without running the sick memory speeds that I do, this is a huge gain in performance but for me it requires a lot of vmem and high end memory to run upwards of 2300Mhz (4700Mhz uclk) the memory controller has exceptional is its stability at this speed, I have not reached top speed and it will take even faster ram and more vmem to achieve that.

---

Fugger, is there any real world/synthetic improvements running the memory/uncore in higher speeds ?
Moreover, how does lower/higher timings affect performance, e.g., 7-7-7 vs 9-9-9 ? I wonder if the performance scale with better timing.

"Runaway" is generally en engineering term that describes a abnormal functioning of a part, running in a cause-generates-effect-generates-cause loop. For example, when current passes trough an electronic part some power is dissipated in the form of heat, equal to the part's electrical resistance times the square of the passing current. But the heat is increasing the part's resistance, so the power dissipated on it will increase, wich will make the part even hotter and making it dissipate even more power and so on, usually until either the part self-destructs or a protection system shuts it down. This is called "Thermal Runaway".

I am assuming Fugger noticed a point over wich the current drawn by the CPU increases rapidly because some transistors / junctions enter some kind of loop. There is one chance that it could be simple leakage (unwanted current flow trough theoretically-closed transistors), but i wouldn't bet on it since Intel's 45nm high-k process showed no such problems and the subzero temps should cancel them anyway pretty easy. The second guess, and my money is on this one, is that Nehalem's design is somewhat unfit for high voltages and over a certain value it just starts letting current pass trough it like there's no tomorrow. I have also noticed myself that over about 1.5V things stop scaling, from +50C all the way down to -80C, and this can only be happening due to electronic design.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Micutzu

"Runaway" is generally en engineering term that describes a abnormal functioning of a part, running in a cause-generates-effect-generates-cause loop. For example, when current passes trough an electronic part some power is dissipated in the form of heat, equal to the part's electrical resistance times the square of the passing current. But the heat is increasing the part's resistance, so the power dissipated on it will increase, wich will make the part even hotter and making it dissipate even more power and so on, usually until either the part self-destructs or a protection system shuts it down. This is called "Thermal Runaway".

I am assuming Fugger noticed a point over wich the current drawn by the CPU increases rapidly because some transistors / junctions enter some kind of loop. There is one chance that it could be simple leakage (unwanted current flow trough theoretically-closed transistors), but i wouldn't bet on it since Intel's 45nm high-k process showed no such problems and the subzero temps should cancel them anyway pretty easy. The second guess, and my money is on this one, is that Nehalem's design is somewhat unfit for high voltages and over a certain value it just starts letting current pass trough it like there's no tomorrow. I have also noticed myself that over about 1.5V things stop scaling, from +50C all the way down to -80C, and this can only be happening due to electronic design.

---

If confirmed and not 'solved' that's a big set back for OC.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Micutzu

"Runaway" is generally en engineering term that describes a abnormal functioning of a part, running in a cause-generates-effect-generates-cause loop. For example, when current passes trough an electronic part some power is dissipated in the form of heat, equal to the part's electrical resistance times the square of the passing current. But the heat is increasing the part's resistance, so the power dissipated on it will increase, wich will make the part even hotter and making it dissipate even more power and so on, usually until either the part self-destructs or a protection system shuts it down. This is called "Thermal Runaway".

I am assuming Fugger noticed a point over wich the current drawn by the CPU increases rapidly because some transistors / junctions enter some kind of loop. There is one chance that it could be simple leakage (unwanted current flow trough theoretically-closed transistors), but i wouldn't bet on it since Intel's 45nm high-k process showed no such problems and the subzero temps should cancel them anyway pretty easy. The second guess, and my money is on this one, is that Nehalem's design is somewhat unfit for high voltages and over a certain value it just starts letting current pass trough it like there's no tomorrow. I have also noticed myself that over about 1.5V things stop scaling, from +50C all the way down to -80C, and this can only be happening due to electronic design.

---

If that's the case maybe the issue is specific to FUGGER's cpu and a select few, considering his cpus are on average clocking higher than most folks ??

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by LardArse

Why doesn't anyone admit that there is a high voltage cold bug with these cpus? Anyone who's benched them cold should know.

---

:yepp:

Sounds more like a high voltage bug to me.

Does the (totally stupip, my opinion) Turbo-mode have something to do with the high voltage issues?

High volt when cold it seems.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by eva2000

If that's the case maybe the issue is specific to FUGGER's cpu and a select few, considering his cpus are on average clocking higher than most folks ??

---

Until more guys measure the current somehow we can't know but i am assuming all the chips have the same problem. Mine for example barely did 4.6Ghz @ 1.47V / -50C and the rig was pulling almost 400W in full 8-threaded load from the wall with only 3GB RAM, one HDD and one 8400GS VGA. Pretty high in my opinion considering the low core voltage, too bad at the time i tested i was unaware of the problem and didn't keep my eyes on the wattmeter all the time.

Hmm, maybe this whole thing is only affecting FUGGER's chip because the text he posted earlier looks like someone is describing the CPU for him (Fracois from Intel)?

"vcore ~1.5v, this is a "leaky" high IDV chip, scaling up with higher voltage is possible at a cost of runaway amp phenomena."

"your chip has a limit with all cores loaded that it will runaway on amps till it crashes." FUGGER's post

Francois explains here that there are Core i7 CPUs like the one he and FUGGER are going to use to do similar demo than AMD did with Phenom II:

"freak of statistic, this part is not in the middle distribution of the curve, it actually leak some serious current ... but it does OC, really, like hell." DrWho?'s post

If this is the case, we won't see runaway amp phenomena on "normal" ES and retail CPUs because those are not high leaking chips.

+ we also can't compare our results to FUGGER's chip since they aren't "leaky" high IDV chips picked by Intel :)

What i understand from Fugger's post is that there's a Vcore limit after wich the current just goes insane; the fact of the matter is that all the Core i7 results i've seen so far stop scaling around 1.5V, just like Fugger's chip.

Usual current leakage is a different matter though, I also noticed that high-leak parts (hotter chips) usually do well under subzero but it doesn't have anything to do with the 1.5V limit. Low temperature cancels transistor leaks and under LN2 the 1.5V limit, if it would be caused by regular leakage, would be moved much higher or even disappear completely. But instead it remains at the same value, wich proves it is NOT caused by electrons / voids jumping trough the transistor's insulating layer.

We will get video of this topic next week so stay tuned :)

I'm new around here and thought I would post some of my experiences here. This is all on water cooling.

My thread over at OCF :)

http://www.ocforums.com/showthread.php?t=583975

Great results you have brolloks:up:

JP.

Yes, I am flying to Fugger's Light city this week, and I am taking some serious Kung Fu with me, from the crazy parts, to the super Kung Fu unlocking reserved for Manufacturers ...
The point I was to make is not the max frequency, it is more about fact that a Manufacturer demo is kind of pointless, out of the 100 000 Core i7 we already shipped the day of launch, it is obvious that some of them are just awesome crazy chips.
A manufacturer demo of extreme Overclocking is rarely representative to what the CPUs are on the market.
Since Conroe, I am very carefull not to use Picked processors (When I start controling the perf demos) ... I am going to show you what happen when you actually use picked parts.
The process technology people are actually able to understand what limit a CPU, so, if you look for it, you find a part that will be out of the distribution, but will still quality to sell. Those usually end up into the extreme edition and finish running at high frequency aircool into an OEM build machine, or in a Boxed Extreme Edition. Now, we of course sort them, and we got some extreme extreme parts.
Manufacturer of processors should stick to demonstrate what they are selling, not something that they cannot quaranty to its customer.
when I showed Skulltrail at 4.0Ghz, I knew that thermal cooling was the limits, and the QX9775 were all able to run at 4.0Ghz, if properly installed. (we did not want to quaranty it, for obvious reasons, but it was possible, the only impact was to decrease the life of the CPU)
If a processor does not always archive a frequency, I refuse to show it publically, it avoid to set up expectation that you can not follow up with a real product. Those are my guide lines, and I think everybody is fairly happy of it. I ll break the rule this week , but I want all of you guys to understand that it is not what a CPU maker should be showing. It is about setting expectation.

This baby is running at 4.8Ghz aircooled, without pushing voltage much:
http://www.v12extreme.com/post/IMG_6158.JPG
I know that this baby will fly, because mathematically speaking, it shows the right caracteristic.

I am waiting 5 mores like this Monday, directly from the men who sort them.

(Notice that I go super honnest on the disclosure side)

4.8 on air!!! damn me wanty

Oh boy, looking forward :)~

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Drwho?

Yes, I am flying to Fugger's Light city this week, and I am taking some serious Kung Fu with me, from the crazy parts, to the super Kung Fu unlocking reserved for Manufacturers ...
The point I was to make is not the max frequency, it is more about fact that a Manufacturer demo is kind of pointless, out of the 100 000 Core i7 we already shipped the day of launch, it is obvious that some of them are just awesome crazy chips.
A manufacturer demo of extreme Overclocking is rarely representative to what the CPUs are on the market.
Since Conroe, I am very carefull not to use Picked processors (When I start controling the perf demos) ... I am going to show you what happen when you actually use picked parts.
The process technology people are actually able to understand what limit a CPU, so, if you look for it, you find a part that will be out of the distribution, but will still quality to sell. Those usually end up into the extreme edition and finish running at high frequency aircool into an OEM build machine, or in a Boxed Extreme Edition. Now, we of course sort them, and we got some extreme extreme parts.
Manufacturer of processors should stick to demonstrate what they are selling, not something that they cannot quaranty to its customer.
when I showed Skulltrail at 4.0Ghz, I knew that thermal cooling was the limits, and the QX9775 were all able to run at 4.0Ghz, if properly installed. (we did not want to quaranty it, for obvious reasons, but it was possible, the only impact was to decrease the life of the CPU)
If a processor does not always archive a frequency, I refuse to show it publically, it avoid to set up expectation that you can not follow up with a real product. Those are my guide lines, and I think everybody is fairly happy of it. I ll break the rule this week , but I want all of you guys to understand that it is not what a CPU maker should be showing. It is about setting expectation.

This baby is running at 4.8Ghz aircooled, without pushing voltage much:

I know that this baby will fly, because mathematically speaking, it shows the right caracteristic.

I am waiting 5 mores like this Monday, directly from the men who sort them.

(Notice that I go super honnest on the disclosure side)

---

4800 on air? Ok, you have my attention..:D

oh i see
that's fair enough francois
4.8GHz on air
that is some CPU.....
i wonder what will happen to those CPUs after you are done with them....if a couple of benchers have these and the rest of the ppl dont it's all over benching wise as we'll never be able to find such freak of nature CPUs

Hello Francois and thanks for the insight.

We all understand that there are chips and CHIPS, some clock better and some clock worse and the luck of the pick is very important. But i was more interested in the problem that comes up around 1.5V wich seems to be present on all Core i7 chips, can you confirm and maybe share some info about it ?

Thanks.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by dinos22

oh i see
that's fair enough francois
4.8GHz on air
that is some CPU.....
i wonder what will happen to those CPUs after you are done with them....if a couple of benchers have these and the rest of the ppl dont it's all over benching wise as we'll never be able to find such freak of nature CPUs

---

You think it hasn't happened already ... :rolleyes:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Sampsa

You think it hasn't happened already ... :rolleyes:

---

My guess is that you just got off the phone with Francois!:rofl:

4.8G? What kind of stability are we talking about?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Drwho?

A manufacturer demo of extreme Overclocking is rarely representative to what the CPUs are on the market.

---

Due to all respect, what makes you think AMD used some cherry picked CPUs? Probably they did, probably they did not. They say they didn't. For the next official Intel demo, they will pretend the same with only a few people knowing whether that is true or not.

First of all, as a skeptic enthusiast I don't trust any manufacturer. I want solid proof from people I know and respect knowing where their stuff comes from. What you are trying to proof with your "experience" is beyond my horizon. Looks to me AMD hit a nerve and Intel has to react, even if your plan is entirely your private ambition, still do I get that picture as an outsider. That aspect aside, your experiment will have an impact on the benching scene.

On the one hand, it is exciting to see how far the very cherry, cherry picked CPUs can go, on the other hand, I won't even bother benching Nehalem knowing my CPU is crap and that I would have to buy/get 10.000 or more CPUs to find one that is way better than average and still does not watch what people with inside sources can get.

Now bring it on, show us 7 GHz and discourage AMD and the rest of us ordinary overclockers! =)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Fr3ak

Due to all respect, what makes you think AMD used some cherry picked CPUs? Probably they did, probably they did not. They say they didn't. For the next official Intel demo, they will pretend the same with only a few people knowing whether that is true or not.

First of all, as a skeptic enthusiast I don't trust any manufacturer. I want solid proof from people I know and respect knowing where their stuff comes from. What you are trying to proof with your "experience" is beyond my horizon. Looks to me AMD hit a nerve and Intel has to react, even if your plan is entirely your private ambition, still do I get that picture as an outsider. That aspect aside, your experiment will have an impact on the benching scene.

On the one hand, it is exciting to see how far the very cherry, cherry picked CPUs can go, on the other hand, I won't even bother benching Nehalem knowing my CPU is crap and that I would have to buy/get 10.000 or more CPUs to find one that is way better than average and still does not watch what people with inside sources can get.
Now bring it on, show us 7 GHz and discourage AMD and the rest of us ordinary overclockers! =)

---

But hasn't that always been the case?
Someone shows up with a cpu either bought or gotten from some inside source that does speeds that no one else can match.
It doesn't mean that your chip or mine are crap, just that a better one exists.
That my friend is life and to ignore that just because something better may or does exist is a very negative way to think.
I got to 4226 on air but does seeing this thread with the claims of 4800 on air bother me? No, it does not because I knew I did my best with what I have.
Look at the glass as 1/2 full vs 1/2 empty and you will enjoy life so much more.

it's always the problem of "pretesting" which is well known among manufacturers of memory for exemple...

I think we must be honest (we overclockers & press) if we have doubts about a piece pretested , because this isn't the representative of all the other pieces on the market , It's not correct for readers and future buyers :yepp:

I would like to see more and more Overclockers say how many cpus & cp selected for to found the Golden Pc (or if someone has done) in the threads of overclocking :up:

Dave, it's not a negative way to think, it is a realistic view on things after taking the costs and probability of finding a good CPU into account. In case you want to play in the top 10, you would need such a 4.8 GHz CPU, though I would love to see some details about that system. The 965 I played around with, can't even run at 3.8 GHz WCG stable for more than 16 hours. That was with 1.35V. More voltage and either the CPU or the heatsink starts to melt ;) So, I would say, "my CPU is crap" =)

From the results XS members posted, it seems like there are a lot of CPUs that don't OC too well, especially on LN2, though you don't even need LN2 at -50 :P:

This experiment will proof nothing if you ask me. It is interesting for sure, but as a response to the AMD demo, it has some negative side effects to me. I had the pleasure to meet Francois at Intel Germany in Munich this year and what he told me back then does not seem to match the attitude he is showing right now =/

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Fr3ak

Dave, it's not a negative way to think, it is a realistic view on things after taking the costs and probability of finding a good CPU into account. In case you want to play in the top 10, you would need such a 4.8 GHz CPU, though I would love to see some details about that system. The 965 I played around with, can't even run at 3.8 GHz WCG stable for more than 16 hours. That was with 1.35V. More voltage and either the CPU or the heatsink starts to melt ;) So, I would say, "my CPU is crap" =)

From the results XS members posted, it seems like there are a lot of CPUs that don't OC too well, especially on LN2, though you don't even need LN2 at -50 :P:

This experiment will proof nothing if you ask me. It is interesting for sure, but as a response to the AMD demo, it has some negative side effects to me. I had the pleasure to meet Francois at Intel Germany in Munich this year and what he told me back then does not seem to match the attitude he is showing right now =/

---

The chip I got using a TRUE and 87CFM 120x38mm fan would do Sp1M at 4226, Cinebench at 4005 and for WCG I use 3733 with 1.35v
I'm sure we'll agree that I don't have contacts inside Intel to get a cherry picked chip but maybe the one I got is on the better side of the lot.
I can't tell as it's the only one I've worked with.
Now just because you or I don't get one of the top 10 chips available doesn't mean we should be upset with those that do.
My point remains the same, there will always be someone that has better than what we do and I imagine that 2 weeks from now Francois might even find a better chip than the ones he has now. just life my friend and because you or anyone else doesn't make it to 4800 on air is no statement as to your or their abilities, it's all in what you were working with.
As to Francois here, I think he was very forthcoming and hid nothing.
He's just making the point that there are chips that will do more when chosen for certain characteristics.
Had he showed up with 5 chips and said " I grabbed these off the line as I was leaving Friday" and then showed 4800 on air then yes,people would have a valid complaint, but he didn't do that.

The excuse about using chips from the line is that they could be the worst CPUs ever or the very best ever produced ;)

I have no doubts about Francois being dishonest, I completely trust him and what he says. But coming up with this new Intel demo to show what cherry picked CPUs can do implies that AMD was using cherry picked CPUs, thus making them look bad, regardless if it was true or not, we can't tell.

I only hope by disabling parts of the CPU, Francois will manage to find a cure fore the Nehalem coldbug from which everybody can benefit.

well, now that I got your attention ... the 4.8Ghz on air can be ritch if you turn off the diode that protect the CPU ... it is just running at 120 celcius ... If you can't turn it off, well, your thermal Diode will "save" the CPU and stop you from doing it, and make the processor throttle.
What I am trying to get everybody to understand, a full disclosure is required when you do a Manufacturer demo, because so many tricks can be used, it is too easy to play with.
Just by changing 1 Byte, i got 800Mhz ... hummmm
I think every body got the point now ... it is easy to claim Mhz ...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Sampsa

You think it hasn't happened already ... :rolleyes:

---

well if it does i'll quit overclocking for points and just mess around with stuff that i find interesting from now on like RAM/board tweaking or even bench AMD unless they do the same thing :rolleyes: ...lol not that i was trying hard but there was motivation there and incentive as it was fairly level playing field

current CPUs charles has are also monsters but there was at least one user based bin which has similar clocks so that is still fine but topping current highs with some 6GHz chips for select few would be absolutely unacceptable

Dave there was NEVER a case that a retail user binned cherries could not match or beat cherry ES CPUs until now (i guess we will find this out on the weekend when they bench it)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Drwho?

well, now that I got your attention ... the 4.8Ghz on air can be ritch if you turn off the diode that protect the CPU ... it is just running at 120 celcius ... If you can't turn it off, well, your thermal Diode will "save" the CPU and stop you from doing it, and make the processor throttle.Mhz ...

---

oh i see so you are just taking screens then
try priming that CPU and see what its max is

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by dinos22

oh i see so you are just taking screens then
try priming that CPU and see what its max is

---

all the pics with be posted before Thanks giving week end. :yepp: :up:

looks up the date for Thanksgiving week on google hehehe
[edit]27 Nov for non-americans
:)

I don't think anyone has doubts about the ability of manufacturers to manipulate products to get higher speeds, but usually it turns out whether the statements are true or not when the product hits retail. AMD presented a 3GHz Phenom at either Games Convention or Cebit (can't remember), that never hit retail. Even most early CPUs could not be overclocked to 3 GHz. Why you are in such a rush now to show that AMD might have used dirty tricks is still something I don't get. In 6 weeks we will know the result when first CPUs are out and overclocked.

I only hope you will make available what gives you such a performance boost. Changing 8 bits sounds rather complicated. Would be nice to have some solid proof. You said that you could do 6 GHz or that you have done 6 GHz on Nehalem. Interesting if true, but without proof it is just a claim. Now that you made clear, that the 4.8 GHz were done using "dirty tricks" as you might call it :D makes it sound more reasonable. The CPUs I tried so far, were reaching 85C loaded on 4 cores with about 3.8 GHz and 1.35 V.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by dinos22

looks up the date for Thanksgiving week on google hehehe
[edit]27 Nov for non-americans
:)

---

3 days yet ^^

PS for Dino : i have see the match of Rugby yesterday in the stade, congratz for the team Austalian , impressive power & mastery !!! :up:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Micutzu

What i understand from Fugger's post is that there's a Vcore limit after wich the current just goes insane

---

So the CPU at some point of increasing the Vcore will reach a threshold where it starts to pull more volts then what you have set it to due to the leakage?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Fr3ak

I don't think anyone has doubts about the ability of manufacturers to manipulate products to get higher speeds, but usually it turns out whether the statements are true or not when the product hits retail. AMD presented a 3GHz Phenom at either Games Convention or Cebit (can't remember), that never hit retail. Even most early CPUs could not be overclocked to 3 GHz. Why you are in such a rush now to show that AMD might have used dirty tricks is still something I don't get. In 6 weeks we will know the result when first CPUs are out and overclocked.

I only hope you will make available what gives you such a performance boost. Changing 8 bits sounds rather complicated. Would be nice to have some solid proof. You said that you could do 6 GHz or that you have done 6 GHz on Nehalem. Interesting if true, but without proof it is just a claim. Now that you made clear, that the 4.8 GHz were done using "dirty tricks" as you might call it :D makes it sound more reasonable. The CPUs I tried so far, were reaching 85C loaded on 4 cores with about 3.8 GHz and 1.35 V.

---

for 6Ghz++ , we are going to try and see! The phylosophy of Nehalem design was all the opposite, best performance in 130Watts ... so, it is already nice to see all those power saving technology running at 5Ghz++. Remember, Nehalem has power gating, the influance of low temperature on those new kind of transistor has to be understood.
The next week experiment will help us to understand more.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Fr3ak

I don't think anyone has doubts about the ability of manufacturers to manipulate products to get higher speeds, but usually it turns out whether the statements are true or not when the product hits retail. AMD presented a 3GHz Phenom at either Games Convention or Cebit (can't remember), that never hit retail. Even most early CPUs could not be overclocked to 3 GHz. Why you are in such a rush now to show that AMD might have used dirty tricks is still something I don't get. In 6 weeks we will know the result when first CPUs are out and overclocked.

I only hope you will make available what gives you such a performance boost. Changing 8 bits sounds rather complicated. Would be nice to have some solid proof. You said that you could do 6 GHz or that you have done 6 GHz on Nehalem. Interesting if true, but without proof it is just a claim. Now that you made clear, that the 4.8 GHz were done using "dirty tricks" as you might call it :D makes it sound more reasonable. The CPUs I tried so far, were reaching 85C loaded on 4 cores with about 3.8 GHz and 1.35 V.

---

Freak what you are forgetting is DrWho works with this stuff for a living. He can do practically anything with these and has the knowledge to do it. The guy is a professional. He knows exactly how these chips work and could make them do practially anything that is physically possible. I wouldn't question him for a minute. he is a highly educated, highly experienced professional.

Now saying that, he can have fun too, and if he wants to clock a chip to 6GHz more power to him. he is under no obligation to share how he did it no more than anyone else here. If he wants to he can, or if he doesn't that is fine too. If he posts the results that would be really cool. He doesn't have to even post a verification for me. His word is good enough for me.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Fr3ak

The excuse about using chips from the line is that they could be the worst CPUs ever or the very best ever produced ;)

I have no doubts about Francois being dishonest, I completely trust him and what he says. But coming up with this new Intel demo to show what cherry picked CPUs can do implies that AMD was using cherry picked CPUs, thus making them look bad, regardless if it was true or not, we can't tell.

I only hope by disabling parts of the CPU, Francois will manage to find a cure fore the Nehalem coldbug from which everybody can benefit.

---

Does it? or is it simply a demonstration of what can be done and have nothing to do with AMD or anyone else?
Again, it's all in how you look at things and is the glass 1/2 full or 1/2 empty.
I look for the positive and try and ignore the negative.

I think that saying this is a response to the new AMD hitting 5ghz is a little unfair. Weve seen retail nehalems at 5+Ghz already, no need to prove that. I think DrWho is just trying to shed some light on these new chips for us overclockers! We should be thanking him for his valuable insights and intricate knowledge of this architecture. Not trying to put the Red vs. Blue spin on it (god knows there are enough threads about that s(h)ift already just look in the news section).

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by TheKarmakazi

I think that saying this is a response to the new AMD hitting 5ghz is a little unfair.

---

And my outsider's opinion is that is exactly the case, or why else 'advertise' it?
Intel doesnt need to fly to Fugger's house to test cherry modded CPU's to simply get a better understanding of what happens at low temperatures ;)
Flying to Fugger's house on the other hand does get a lot of publicity ;)

I really hope these modded/super cherry parts never make their way onto hwbot btw.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by TheKarmakazi

I think that saying this is a response to the new AMD hitting 5ghz is a little unfair. Weve seen retail nehalems at 5+Ghz already, no need to prove that. I think DrWho is just trying to shed some light on these new chips for us overclockers! We should be thanking him for his valuable insights and intricate knowledge of this architecture. Not trying to put the Red vs. Blue spin on it (god knows there are enough threads about that s(h)ift already just look in the news section).

---

Dudesss, I am like anybody else, I like competition, this is fun when AMD start showing the teeth :yepp:

Before I compete, I like setting up the rules, and explain the themes ... I just did that. Some people think that I was "shooting" at AMD, but in fact. I was just spelling the rules of the game (Since they did dissable the thermal diode, allowing them to do the trick I did to get to 4.8Ghz)

Guys, I really want to be fair and honnest, do not give me the bad guy shirt here, I went open 100%.

Francois

I dont think anyone is saying you are a bad guy Francois :)
Just people questioning your motives, which you have just explained.
If this is being done in direct retaliation to AMD's recent event, then Intel would not be the first company to do so (wrt a competitor). Seen it many times!

So if you dissable the diode, can you also run Intel processor at -196C pot temperature?

Absolutely I think its great that AMD has an ace up their sleeve. Competition makes all aspects better for the consumer (price, performance, choices). Would love to OC some AMDs again, and have them neck in neck in terms of performance against an intel. Thats why I havent purchased an i7 yet, I'm waiting too see how AMD will perform.

Im just very interested in any info on the coldbugs, and potential things happening at extreme OC's (which I believe was this threads intent). Whether or not AMD was using cherry picked cpus or not is another matter completely. I like the transparency being displayed here also, because that way it heads off any speculation.

Its an honor to be given this opportunity as well as the knowledge to be gained is invaluable.

My current chip is a good chip, the chip that Francois is showing is a cherry chip. I see that it scares Oliver, heh

I have seen the Amps fly on many boards and many chips, the voltage bug Peter is talking about may be the same, we need a better description.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Drwho?

well, now that I got your attention ... the 4.8Ghz on air can be ritch if you turn off the diode that protect the CPU ... it is just running at 120 celcius ... If you can't turn it off, well, your thermal Diode will "save" the CPU and stop you from doing it, and make the processor throttle.
What I am trying to get everybody to understand, a full disclosure is required when you do a Manufacturer demo, because so many tricks can be used, it is too easy to play with.
Just by changing 1 Byte, i got 800Mhz ... hummmm
I think every body got the point now ... it is easy to claim Mhz ...

---

woah 120C.. interesting to see how long the cpu lasts at those kinds of temps too :)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Drwho?

Dudesss, I am like anybody else, I like competition, this is fun when AMD start showing the teeth :yepp:

Before I compete, I like setting up the rules, and explain the themes ... I just did that. Some people think that I was "shooting" at AMD, but in fact. I was just spelling the rules of the game (Since they did dissable the thermal diode, allowing them to do the trick I did to get to 4.8Ghz)

Guys, I really want to be fair and honnest, do not give me the bad guy shirt here, I went open 100%.

Francois

---

What are the chances we will also be able to disable the thermal diode? ;)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by miahallen

What are the chances we will also be able to disable the thermal diode? ;)

---

None, this is too dangerous, one booting without the right voltage and cooling is fatal.
Trust me, it would become a dissaster, it is like removing the self preservation of the human kind ... watch the movie "The happening". :up:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Drwho?

None, this is too dangerous, one booting without the right voltage and cooling is fatal.
Trust me, it would become a dissaster, it is like removing the self preservation of the human kind ... watch the movie "The happening". :up:

---

That's what I figured :ROTF:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Drwho?

None, this is too dangerous, one booting without the right voltage and cooling is fatal.
Trust me, it would become a dissaster, it is like removing the self preservation of the human kind ... watch the movie "The happening". :up:

---

there must be related to the Cold boot / Cold bug, it seems that Hipro has managed to circumvent the problem with a prototype he used to contest MSI Europe in Amsterdam i think :)

many uses LN2 here, but in some countries the price is very expensive, the most economical a long term is the cascade into 2 or 3 stages but it's difficult to adjust the temp when the cpu cold boot quickly :(

it looks like 920/940 for the best cooling seems to be the WaterChill / dod for the base clock is limited by cold. I have test a few the 920 / 940 step B0 and it's better than my 940 C0 ES (not lucky :D)

For the 965XE, it seems the "petit bonheur la chance" ....

Nehalem of overclocking is fairly easy to find the limit cpu but very difficult to find the golden chips in Cold :)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by miahallen

What are the chances we will also be able to disable the thermal diode? ;)

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Drwho?

None, this is too dangerous, one booting without the right voltage and cooling is fatal.
Trust me, it would become a dissaster, it is like removing the self preservation of the human kind ... watch the movie "The happening". :up:

---

boooooo

party pooper :D

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Drwho?

None, this is too dangerous, one booting without the right voltage and cooling is fatal.
Trust me, it would become a dissaster, it is like removing the self preservation of the human kind ... watch the movie "The happening". :up:

---

I think you missed the title of these forums: XTREMEsystems.

If we don't kill our cpu's by disabling the thermal diode (via PECI?), we certainly will by using excessive voltage to get the cpu to run higher frequencies :D

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Drwho?

None, this is too dangerous, one booting without the right voltage and cooling is fatal.
Trust me, it would become a dissaster, it is like removing the self preservation of the human kind ... watch the movie "The happening". :up:

---

For many of us here, that is the case every time we boot up. So why not give us the option? :D

Right now there is no option to disable it in bios, it might be the same as cutting the THERMTRIP trace.

Intersting discussion(s) in last few pages.

Looking forward to the results :)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by T_M

I really hope these modded/super cherry parts never make their way onto hwbot btw.

---

Imho live overclocking events will become more and more valuable where everyone have exactly same parts / time restrictions.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by FUGGER

Right now there is no option to disable it in bios, it might be the same as cutting the THERMTRIP trace.

---

That has been tried before on the Wolfdale and failed to remove the coldbug. Afaik, the Thermtrip trace is only the consequence of thermal issues, so even if you'd cut the trace, the issues would already have occured and therefor cutting it has no effect on the coldbug. Hipro already has made some sort of coldbug remover and he did say it hasn't got anything to do with the Thermtrip.

My bet would be on the Prochot trace. As it's possible to change this trace from uni-directional to bi-directional, you can change it from being solely an output to being both output and input. Now, the Prochot trace is connected to the TCC, Thermal Control Circuit, which is designed to protect the processor from any damage in case of thermal issues. If the processor has thermal issues, the TCC can either:

-Alter the Frequency or voltage of the processor in order to get the cpu within safe temperature range
-Turn on Clock Modulation, which apparently is rapidly turning the clocks off and on at a duty cycle which should reduce power dissipation by about 50%.

Normally, the when the TCC is enabled, the Prochot signal is turned on, which indicates that the TCC limits have been crossed. Normally, this is an output, however, if you change it to an input signal, you make it possible to influence the TCC, telling it there's no temperature problem. If you then force Prochot to be disabled at all times, the TCC won't kick in as it's informed by Prochot.

This is not a fact, people, just a theory. I might be off by miles!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Drwho?

Some people think that I was "shooting" at AMD, but in fact. I was just spelling the rules of the game (Since they did dissable the thermal diode, allowing them to do the trick I did to get to 4.8Ghz)

---

DrWho, not having a stab at you or anything, but do you have solid evidence that AMD did disable the thermal diode and/or use cherry picked chips when they did the demo?

Edit: Am thoroughly interested to see how well your cherry picked chips oc as well. Sounds like a monster so far.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by T_Flight

Freak what you are forgetting is DrWho works with this stuff for a living. He can do practically anything with these and has the knowledge to do it. The guy is a professional. He knows exactly how these chips work and could make them do practially anything that is physically possible. I wouldn't question him for a minute. he is a highly educated, highly experienced professional.

---

Don't get me wrong. I know exactly who DrWho? is. He is a genius in my eyes and I enjoyed every minute of talking to him. I don't question his motives or him being dishonest, but the way he introduced his OC demo in the AMD thread was a bit unlucky, to say the least.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Movieman

Does it? or is it simply a demonstration of what can be done and have nothing to do with AMD or anyone else?
Again, it's all in how you look at things and is the glass 1/2 full or 1/2 empty.
I look for the positive and try and ignore the negative.

---

Propagating this upcoming demo in a thread that is about AMD's OC demo gives it a negative look and the impression that it has something to do with AMD, you can't argue with that ;) I am talking about this thread btw: http://www.xtremesystems.org/forums/...d.php?t=208369

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by FUGGER

Its an honor to be given this opportunity as well as the knowledge to be gained is invaluable.

My current chip is a good chip, the chip that Francois is showing is a cherry chip. I see that it scares Oliver, heh

I have seen the Amps fly on many boards and many chips, the voltage bug Peter is talking about may be the same, we need a better description.

---

I don't doubt that this gathering will bring us more insight into this phenomenum. Probably I haven't been clear enough: I have 2 converns:

1) Advertising this demo in the AMD OC demo thread to show what can be done with manipulated CPUs implies AMD has cheated. Francois could have come up with this idea in a more elegant way ;)

2) My fear is that those CPUs will find their ways into Hwbot, thus making it impossible for everyone else to catch up by finding a equally good CPU. Getting "ordinary" hardware for free, but getting cherry picked stuff in a way that no one else can cherry pick in the same way, is something way different.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Drwho?

None, this is too dangerous, one booting without the right voltage and cooling is fatal.
Trust me, it would become a dissaster, it is like removing the self preservation of the human kind ... watch the movie "The happening". :up:

---

You seem to forget where you are =) Do you think anyone here using LN2 and 2 Volts on C2D/C2Q cares about the loss of a CPU? If it can be done in a way that it is obvious the CPU has been manipulated thus losing all warranty, why not give extreme overclockers that option?

I know this question isn't going with the current conversation but what are your guys current NB temps on a 920 or 940 when taking your blck to around 200 or more? Particularly on Asus boards like the Rampage II or P6D.. Is water cooling needed to do this or would be buying a NB block be a waste of money for this chip-set? I'm not talking about anything too extreme here. around 4 to 4.3 ghz on water.

4.3 on water shouldn't be too hard to get to; I was running some quick runs at 1.61x and was stable enough for some benching...

Depends on what board you are using. On some boards, I noticed that the NB temp skyrocked after a little increase in voltage. Having a simple fan in the NB area helped a lot. But lower temperatures will not help you with your overclock. 222 MHz BCLK is far as you can go, depending on your CPU, but from what I can tell, NB temperature has next to no influence in max BCLK. I reached the highest speed with the Biostar and the MSI board without additinal cooling and NB temp was in the high 70's due to bad contact.

offtopic:

Here is pic of Finnish singer Jorma Kääriäinen:

http://www.netti-iskelmat.com/verkko...kaariainen.gif

And here is Francois Piednoel from Intel:

http://plaza.fi/s/f/editor/images/1123intel2.jpg

Wtf.. lost twin brother?

:D :D :D

Hahaha. They actually look like eachother quite a lot.:p:

Hyvä löytö:clap: