I know that, that's why i'm asking, which one should i trust, because i can't the CPU working ot 465x8.5 with 1.4VTT. I just keep freezing and freezing in idle, no matter what i do! Please, help me.
Printable View
I know that, that's why i'm asking, which one should i trust, because i can't the CPU working ot 465x8.5 with 1.4VTT. I just keep freezing and freezing in idle, no matter what i do! Please, help me.
Lower your VTT and increase CPU voltage, should make difference.Quote:
Originally Posted by spoof
And razz you really know now what your doing? Those volts for 400FSB... Sigh.
You should be really happy if you havent blowed something up already.
The print-screen is only to show the max-voltage for a review :)Quote:
Originally Posted by carepolice
It should, but it does not. Actually, it's Prime-stable for more than 3 hours, at this time i'm running it at 1.4065, BIOS says it's 1.352, OCCT says 1.36. If i lower it or increase it, it just affect the stability in Prime(actually, 1.4125 is the max, what i was trying). And again, which value is real - 1.4VTT BIOS set, or BIOS Hardware Monitoring and Everest - 1.34. And can i lower VTT and set 67x for GTLREF or it's too much?Quote:
Originally Posted by carepolice
Being a Q6600, a GTL Ref of around 0.65x should give you optimal results. So reduce the 0.667x and increase the 0.635x.Quote:
Originally Posted by WhiteFireDragon
Yep thats fine. I have given some other alternative settings like +10/-30/+10/-30 and others in a previous post so try some other combos too. When I use Vtt ~1.20v my e8400 likes +50/+10/+50/+10 for the GTL's.Quote:
Originally Posted by ante_ante
Perhaps setting the appropriate vcore and Vtt, (probably around 1.4vcore & 1.3 - 1.4v Vtt for 4GHz) and using around 1.3 - 1.4 vNB (vMCH) then setting GTL's to around 0.75 - 0.85v should work. Leave your NB (MCH) GTL Ref around the 0.64x Vtt mark.Quote:
Originally Posted by Razzz
This depends on your Vtt, have a read through the thread and get an understanding of the relationship between the GTL's and Vtt (vFSB).Quote:
Originally Posted by hoskic
neither can really be trusted 100%, but either setting is below the absolute max intel spec. You can always check with a DMM look for the measure points or ask in your mobo thread for someone to show you where to measure it.Quote:
Originally Posted by spoof
Sounds like you have one or more voltage settings too low, or your GTL's arent set up. However crashing/locking up on idle is usually only affecting people using LLC and from your vdrop it appears you are not using it. Make sure your vNB (vMCH) is set high enough to keep it stable, and make sure your ram is stable also.Quote:
Originally Posted by spoof
If you cant find what setting is responsible for the instability, drop the speed until it is stable and work up from there again.
Also running 0.67x GTL ref with ~1.34 Vtt is fine you just need to keep your Vref under ~1.0v as the max. that setting would give you 0.897v which is fine.
See if more vmch unlock up to 1.4vtt?Quote:
Originally Posted by Demo
First of all, i'm extremly thankfull, that you are trying to help!Quote:
Originally Posted by CryptiK
So, here is what i've done so far:
vNB is set to 1.51 with GTLREF Auto. Increasing it to 1.53 don't solve the problem.
CPU voltage is set to 1.4065 as i sayd, but i figured out, that i just affect prime stability.
I've tried CPU PLL values from 1.52 to 1.66, no change at all, may be with lower setting it freezes "slower".
FSB Termination (or VTT) - from 1.20 to 1.42(right now), with 1.42 it's still working, but even with lower value sometimes it works for days before lockup.
This is all i have for the CPU.
My memory is PC8800 (1100Mhz) and while testing the cpu i'm using it at 1:1 - so no problem here.
The one think, that i noticed - 450x8.5 with vCPU 1.3725 1.5 CPU PLL and 1.2VTT i have now lockups. With same voltages 455x8.5 it freezes, so i need to increase VTT. So i think this is the critical voltage, but i'm still no much into it, safe range and etc. GTLREF set from 59x to 65x doesn't help too.
Sorry for my english.
:edit: Just froze at 1.42VTT too :confused: Trying 1.36VTT with 0.67x GTLREF
Hmm ok. Try using 1.3725 vcore, 1.22 Vtt, 0.67x GTL Ref, 1.55 vNB at 455 FSB. Also try advancing you ram skews to around 250 - 300ps if you have them.
Also, can you raise GTL Ref above 0.67x? I have seen some guys with C0 stepping 9550's needing around the 0.68x - 0.73x mark for 4GHz, but some also need around 1.42v load for stability at 4GHz.
Just to add my :2cents:. Looking at what he said about the whole days before locking up.. Mine does this if I have my NBv set to high. I can run it fine and then wam it will do something stupid like never boot to where I have to reset it to get it to boot. If I have my voltage on my nb set just right it never happens. My example I am refering to is in better detail,,, If I set my NBV to 1.34 this issue will happen.. If I leave it set to what I have it set to right now, 1.3v it never does this.. My :2cents:.Quote:
Originally Posted by CryptiK
I'll try this too, it isn't impomssible. What about GTLREF on NB? Is there something to be aware of? I'm using it now with vNB 1.51 and 57x GTLREF.
I would try backing it down to say 1.34 and leave the gtl ref for it "nb" set to auto and see if you can boot with it set like this.Quote:
Originally Posted by spoof
Yep, this would be the next step. Now - 1.4125 vCPU, 1.50 CPU PLL, 1.38VTT, 67x GTLREF, vNB 1.51 with 57x GTLREF, LLC disable. And skews set to normal for both channels.Quote:
Originally Posted by truehighroller
For the NB GTL Ref, this is how it works out for me up to about 486fsb with my chip and board:
VTT X CPU GTL Ref = TREF divided by my NB Voltage = NB GTL.
So:
1.30vtt x 0.675 CPU/GTL = 0.8775 TREF Divided by 1.36 NB Voltage = 0.64522 = NB GTL of .645 to .650.
This has worked all the way up to 486fsb for me, testing 488fsb closer now but it seems it is doing OK there as well. Just thought I'd throw that in the mix.
Larry
I'm sorry, I was thinking you are on a P5Q Deluxe...:p: I looked at your signature again and was like oops... Our boards are different Larry. My guess is that you aren't to bad off at 1.5NBv considering it is x48. Long busy day at work, sorry for the confusion.Quote:
Originally Posted by spoof
You mean, 1.5v isn't very high? Just tried lower the vNB to 1.39 (or 1.40, dunno) i it froze just after logon. So, could more vNB fix the problem? It's easy, i'll put it under water, so no worry about t*, but will fix it?Quote:
Originally Posted by truehighroller
With a quad and 4x2gb of memory you'll need lots of NB. I've been told that 1.6v is "safe" as long as you control the temps.
I'm testing 1.53 right now trying to stabilize 442x9 and I only have 2x2GB of memory.
(Luckily, this MB has an awesome heatsink on the NB and PWM chips.)
I don't know. I think that will be fine. My experties are with p45. Can some one chime in for him on this one. I think you will be fine with a little more let's see if I'm right or not.Quote:
Originally Posted by spoof
I had the DFI X48 LP LT DDR2 board, I ran 1.56v on the NB daily, I think even 1.6v is fine on that chipset as long as temps are ok.
Larry
with the x48 as long as u keep nb temps sane ( < 50c ) you can push all the voltage into it u want, but 1.6-1.65v and it becomes pretty frivolous since it just makes more heat and little gain. i ran 1.59v on mine air cooled for ages. I run 1.49v now cause tight Performance Level on top of highish FSB freq isn't very healthy for day to day use, generally ends up with memory errors or random software faults (ie windows search randomly couldnt find files on my system). I use PL 7 with 466MHz fsb and 1.49v vNB and 0.63x NB GTLREF and thats what mine likes at this freq.
um my vtt should be 1.38v in bios which gives an output voltage of 1.41v atthe sensor.
Very strange........normally Rampage Formula sets the VTT 0.06-0.08 V down the BIOS programmed value.Quote:
Originally Posted by mikeyakame
Mine, for example, with 1.40 V programmed in BIOS, read 1.32 from the sensor...:confused:
Make sure you do a cmos clear after flashing the bios. With my asus boards if i flash and dont clear cmos afterwards the real voltages change even when you use the same setting in bios as before. If you clear cmos, the voltage goes back to what it used to be for that setting.
Yeah the board is quarky that is for sure. It doesn weird things with latencies to if you don't really clear the cmos good after flashing.
I was wondering, is GTLref still playing as large a roll in i7 as it sometimes does in core 2? Haven't come across much info on that yet myself.
i use loadline calibration perhaps that is why?Quote:
Originally Posted by Brama
I thought that LLC was only for VCC and not for Vtt or other voltages? It makes no difference to voltages other than VCC on my board.
Asus boards do seem all over the place these days though, I think their QC has all but disappeared. I have seen many times now people setting the same voltages in bios and getting very different real voltage readings. Every time I flashed my P5Q-Deluxe I would get different real voltages when I set the same voltages in bios as I had before the flash.
I think they are cutting so many corners during manufacture there is no consistency anymore.
Hi Mike, thank you for all the information thus far, I've finally gained some better understanding on VTT and GTL. All other articles I've come across are either vague or utterly confusing.Quote:
Originally Posted by mikeyakame
So based on what I've read here, my settings should be:
CPU vCore: 1.475v
CPU PLL: 1.58v
CPU GTL Ref: 1 / 1.475 = x0.67
NB: 1.49v
VTT: 1.48v
NB GTL: 0.80 / 1.48 = x0.57
Am I correct? Thanks!
i have queastion about GTL settings on maximus II formula. In bios there is nothing like x0.667 or x0.635 wit GTL's but mV, can somebody help me to find our how to adjust this settings?
try 1.46/1.48v vtt with 0.63 - 0.65x for cpu, and nb try 0.61-0.63xQuote:
Originally Posted by LuckySevn
you'll just have to find the sweet spot for your fsb frequency and your particular board.
normally i find if i use the right vtt voltage, then i can just set 0.65x for cpu and 0.63x for nb!
Thanks for the heads up man, I'll try it and report back! =D :up:Quote:
Originally Posted by mikeyakame
Hello ppll!
After some weeks of test to get my settings prime aproved i can only do Small ffts 15mts and sometimes more... but i cant get my Volts lower than this need your help!!!
Q9550 Asus P5Q3 DLx Gskill 2x 2gb DDR3 1333 CL7
CPU Ratio Setting: 8.5
FSB Frequency: 475
PCIE Frequency: 100
FSB Strap To North Bridge: AUTO
DRAM Frequency: 1584 !!!!
DRAM CLK Skew on Channel A1: Auto
DRAM CLK Skew on Channel A2: Auto
DRAM CLK Skew on Channel B1: Auto
DRAM CLK Skew on Channel B2: Auto
DRAM Timing Control: Manual !!!!
CAS Latency: 7
DRAM RAS to CAS Delay: 7
DRAM RAS Precharge: 7
DRAM RAS Activate to Precharge: 18
RAS TO RAS Delay: 6
Row Refresh Cycle Time: 60
Write Recovery Time: 10
Read To Precharge Time: 6
Read to Write Delay: Auto
Write to Read (s): 6
Write to Read (d): 6
Read to Read (s): Auto
Read to Read (d): Auto
Write to Write(s): Auto
Write to Write(d): Auto
Write to Pre Delay: Auto
Read to Pre Delay: 6
Pre to Pre Delay: Auto
All Pre to Act Delay: Auto
All Pre to REF Delay: Auto
DRAM Static Read Control: Disabled
DRAM Dynamic Write Control: Disabled
DRAM Read Training: Disabled
DRAM Write Training: Disabled
MEM OC Charger: DISABLE
Ai Clock Twister: auto
AI Transaction Booster: AUTO
CPU Voltage: 1.40
CPU GTL Voltage Reference (0/2): Auto
CPU GTL Voltage Reference (1/3): Auto
CPU PLL Voltage: 1.70
FSB Termination Voltage: 1.36
DRAM Voltage: 1.94
NB Voltage: 1.32
NB GTL Voltage: Auto
SB Voltage: 1.20
PCIE SATA Voltage: 1.60
Load-Line Calibration: Enabled
CPU Spread Spectrum: Disabled
PCIE Spread Spectrum: Disabled
CPU Clock Skew: AUTO
NB Clock Skew: AUTO
Before i get to other values i want to get Prime Stable on this.
Any input helps! tks!
vox
Ok, i have this - 1.4 vCPU, 1.54 CPU PLL, 1.36FSBt with x67GTLREF, vNB 1.57, DRAM CLK Screw A/B to Normal.Quote:
Originally Posted by CryptiK
So, the idea was, that with more vNB, since i have 4 RAM blocks, i'll fix the mo****f****** lockup. Well, it still do it - just freeze. Is there anything more what i can do? What about SB voltage?
If that is not an E0 stepping, good luck going higher on that voltage, most top out at around 4GHz @ ~1.42v (real load). You can just try various GTL Refs, start with 0.63x on each one and move up to ~ 0.70x on each one. Whichever gives the longest time in orthos without an error is the best setting. However if you can only pass 15mins without an error, I doubt you can get 100% stable with GTL tweaking. id say your cpu is at its limit.Quote:
Originally Posted by vox
However you could try increasing the vNB, 1.32 is pretty low for DDR3 and that FSB with a quad. Those boards aren't really built for it so you may need to push it. Try 1.40 vNB.
I also assume you have tested the cpu & ram/NB separately using small FFT, large FFT, bootable memtest & windows memtest? What do you pass/fail? Prime is not the only test you need to run, and even with prime you need to run small & large FFT's. Try to give us as much info as possible or else its very hard to know what to suggest to you ok.
Try pulling out 2 ram modules and see if that makes a difference. if it does its your NB at fault.Quote:
Originally Posted by spoof
Have you tested the ram/NB with bootable memtest & windows memtest?
Hmm...tried VTT 1.28v ~ 1.52v (BIOS) with x0.62 ~ x0.67 for CPU; x0.57~x0.67 for NB.Quote:
Originally Posted by mikeyakame
Orthos fails under 3min if CPU GTL set to x0.63 and up, only x0.62 gives me the longest times. For NB anything below x0.60 does not boot at all. x0.63 seems to gives me the longest times in Orthos but still fails with any VTT, vCore and PLL setting. Pushed and lowered NB 1.35v ~ 1.55v (BIOS) to no avail.....
Oh yea and I think the degradation has started....just 3 days ago 4.45GHz was stable with 1.425v vCore, ran for over a month without problems and was passing Orthos/Prime for 3~4 hours. Then it started needing more volt gradually, until now, it needs 1.4625v to boot; 1.475v to get in Vista; and 1.4815v to be stable to run Crysis...:shakes:
Throw the chip back to the wolves and get another one.Quote:
Originally Posted by LuckySevn
how I can to improve these values?
PLL, GTL's, vNB
Code:Q6600 VID 1.2500v
450x8 - 3600mhz
4x1Gb DDR2- 1080
CPU Voltage 1,41250v
CPU GTL Voltage Reference (0/2) 0.630 -- correct?
CPU GTL Voltage Reference (1/3) 0.670 -- correct?
CPU PLL Voltage 1,52
FSB Termination Voltage 1,28
DRAM Voltage 2.10
NB Voltage 1.18
NB GTL Reference 0.630 -- correct?
SB Voltage 1.10
PCIE Voltage 1.50
____________________________________
Load-Line Calibration [Enabled]
CPU Spread Spectrum [Disabled]
PCIE Spread Spectrum [Disabled]
CPU Clock Skew [Auto]
NB Clock Skew [Auto]
CPU Margin Enhancement [Optimized Mode]
____________________________________
Advance CPU Settings:
CPU Ratio Setting:
C1E Support: [Disabled]
Max CPUID Value Limit: [Disabled]
Intel Virtualization Tech: [Disabled]
CPU TM Function: [Disabled]
Execute Disable Bit: [Disabled]
Nope, did it again with two modules. I'll test other two. I'have tested with both, nothing (didn't complete the whole test, but i'll do it again). Anything else? Maybe the MB?Quote:
Originally Posted by CryptiK
It may be the board but I doubt it. I'm actually leaning towards it being your cpu. Try decreasing the cpu speed until you find stability at the same vcore, only using 2 ram modules. Once it is stable, put the other 2 ram modules in again and re-test it.
Actually, i did this in the beginning. With 1.375 (Or 1.4v, doesn't make that difference under water)vCPU, 1.47 vNB, 1.52CPU PLL, 1.34 FSBt with 65x GTLREF it's rock stable. No lockups, Prime95 for hours. This is with 2 and 4 sticks. Also did try 472 with 8.5 and 8 ratio with 2 sticks - it won't load windows at all. So it's FSB issue, but i don't know which is better - CPU or MB. I have here GA-P35-DS3R i'll see if it gonna boot at 472. At this time, any ideas would be greate (:Quote:
Originally Posted by CryptiK
You'll find above 475MHz FSB it's very hit and miss. You have to use low multiplier to get it stable in my experience. I use 7x, but on a 45nm chip I'd use 7.5 since it would give best results. High CPU freq on high fsb on the X48 boards that arent the Rampage Extreme is very difficult to stabilize. Voltage circuitry can't provide stable enough voltage on all the FSB / CPU phases.
I personally found 7x 466MHz on my RF with the Q6600 is a sweet spot. Only need 1.35v Vcc for 3.26GHz, and 1.49V Vnb for PL7 on 5:6 divider.
Edit: here we go seems ok, i'll visit the bios and photo the screens and add them here for current settings.
bios settings 482mhz fsb q6600 g0 7x482.
472 FSB is getting high for an older X48 board, there are a couple that will now do it but perhaps not the P5E - look in your mobo's thread for other people running quads for any recommendations.Quote:
Originally Posted by spoof
As you said try it in the P35, although I'm not sure if it's capable of the FSB/clocks you're after. the P5K-Deluxe certainly would be but the Gigabyte I've not had experience with.
If only running 2GB of ram did not haelp at all, I doubt it is the NB, so that leaves the cpu itself or the FSB capability of the mobo. You can verify the cpu can run that FSB & overall clock stable on another board, really raise the vcore and test if its the cpu (some cpu's just cannot go over a certain FSB and it is not the board holding it back) or get very aggressive with the vNB for a few tests.
i concur with CryptiK, some chips are better for high multiplier/freq & low fsb, some mid fsb, high frequency, mid multi, others high fsb, lower multi, mid frequency, and then u got chips which just completely suck!~
Well, i am very, very thankful that you are trying to help! I appreciate it. Actually, i'm familiar with so called FSB Wall, but on my other CPU (6750) i did actually push it a bit with new BIOS and got more than 20Mhz more with CPU PLL voltage settings. I'm gonna test it here, because it works on 470. If it's ok - than it's Q9550 faults. If not - i'll change the mobo.
Also, i wonna thank for the bios pic, may be i'll test some settings(the "small" RAM timings).
few minor adjustments, incr fsb by 1 to 483mhz, mem to 5-5-5-16 tRFC 70, pull in phase PHA1, ai clock twister moderate, dram clock skew 100ps advance channel b, Vnb 1.53v, Vdimm 1.98v, Vcc 1.3875v, CPU GTLREF 0.65x.
nb: note read delay adjust, dimm fine delay values, i set these manually by the combination of settings for ai clock twister, ai trans booster pull ins and dram clock skews.
read delay phase adjust +1 is from phase pull in on A1, B1 caused errors so instead I advanced the clock skew on chan b by 100ps which should be equiv to -2T on Dimm 3 fine delay. ai clock twister stronger -> moderate reduces dimm fine delay value, stronger was 5 , 3 , 5 , 3. Moderate changed to 3, 2 , 3 , 2 on dimm 1 - 4 fine delay. Pull in phase A1 on AI trans booster for PL, incremented Dimm 1 fine delay by 1 to 4T, and 100ps advance on Dram Skew CHB while not changing Dimm 3 value directly corrected the diff in skews and fixed memory errors!
latency is improved. this is as stable as it'll ever be, been playing red alert 3, thrashing my gpu on Vantage, linpack, etc and no crashes or errors.
is this right?:
cpu vcore 1,39
Cpu gtl refrence 0\2:0.670
Cpu gtl refrence 3\4:0.670
I use Formula 2, and struggle to understand this:S
Thanks for the help=)
May I join in :)
I was playing with these values recently but
unfortunately...my GTL gettings has become +-mv which allow fine tuning but difficult to control. Spec as sig.
The problem is I was never be able to find out what the current values of CPU GTL Ref and NB GTL Ref are (especially on "AUTO") so I wonder where should I start with...
I've heard alot of overclockers said CPU GTL Ref. don't have much effect with Dual Core chips. Is that true...if so..seems I'm wasting my time messing up these settings :rolleyes:
Adjusting the CPU GTL Ref. will case wierd screen display, frequent crashes in programs:
CPU GTL 0: auto
CPU GTL 1: -5mv
CPU GTL 2: auto
CPU GTL 3: -5mv
NB GTL: auto
VTT was about 1.28v, can someone please tell me why this would happen? Any help would be much appreciated.:(
Hi, does anyone know if clock skews have an effect on GTL settings ?
I have just updated my bios and had to change from -'ve to +'ve GTL settings after setting :-
CPU Clock Skew: Delay 300ps
NB Clock Skew: Delay 200ps
Maybe Asus just programmed the bios wrong ???.
hmm its possible I suppose, since gtl reference determines clock period, skewing it probably changes the clock assert/deassert timing in relation to the base clock and gtl reference voltage is used to determine a valid low or high clock with respect to the clocking source (bclk). It may be skewing the clock assert/deassert for either the cpu or nb could create a situation where either assert/deassert for nb/cpu clock happen too early or too late and occur inside the crossing threshold or basically not within the valid area of a clock period, which exists where the high clock crosses the crossing threshold on the rising edge and crosses it again on the falling edge (determined by slew rate, rising of voltage / distance unit), and on the low clock it happens the other way around.Quote:
Originally Posted by rob2k
nb clock skew and cpu clock skew work a little different than the name suggests. nb clock skew actually refers to mch side of nb with relation to the fsb base clock, and cpu clock skew is the cpu clock in relation to the fsb bclk. dram clock skew is actually the skewing of the address strobe clock between the dram controller side of mch and actual memory modules.
Yeah. :lol: English man.
i'm tired, translating a foreign electronics dialect into english is a lot of work! I'll translate it tomorrow after I get some sleep, right now i'm too worn out from work to explain it for the people :DQuote:
Originally Posted by truehighroller
Quote:
Originally Posted by mikeyakame
:p:
i was wondering what multiplier/percentage asus are using for the nb gtl ref on the rampage extreme too (0.67?). anyone know? or know how to find out please?Quote:
Originally Posted by ci2kla
Hi Mikeyakame, and many thanks :up: for taking the time for the concise reply although I don't understand it 100% :confused2 it's good to know that it is in theory possible and that I haven't got things horribly wrong :)Quote:
Originally Posted by mikeyakame
guys, is there a method for calculate the NB GTL?
Yeah mate it's exactly the same as for the cpu.
GTL Ref x Vtt = NB Vref
If you have +/- mv settings use them to alter the ratio.
For example my NB GTL Ref = 0.64x
So 0.64 x 1.2v = 0.768v
Anyone with Rampage Formula X48 and 45nm Wolfdale chip? I really need a little help now with lowering my voltages...my current settings below:
CPU Ratio: 8.5x
FSB Freq: 530
PCIE Freq: 100
Clock Skew: Auto
DRAM Freq: 1062Mhz
Timings: 5-5-5-15-5-65 rest on Auto
DRAM Static Read: Auto (enable or disable = crash)
Ai Clock Twister: Lighter
Performance Level: 9
CPU Core: 1.50v (1.489v real)
CPU PLL: 1.50v (1.60v real)
NB v: 1.47v (1,49v real)
DRAM: 2.02v (2.04v real)
FSB Term: 1.48v (1.40v real)
LoadLine Calibration: Enabled (disable crash)
SB v: 1.10v (1.16v real)
SB1.5: 1.50v (1.56v real)
CPU GTL: x0.63 (x.062 became unstable suddenly. 65 & 67 crash)
NB GTL: x0.63 (anything lower no boot; higher crash)
Rest on Auto, all Spectrum disabled. C1E, TM Function, SpeedStep disabled.
Please any experts, some inputs are appreciated! I can't lower any of my voltages at all...
subbed for use later :)
thanks mate :)Quote:
Originally Posted by CryptiK
So, how much should be NB Vref? Cause i can get stability with 1.49vNB and 0.64 - not sure if this is safe.Quote:
Originally Posted by CryptiK
HELP!
Sorry to be that guy, but i just need to know what to set mine too...
Currently I have it set to +30mv on GTLVREF 1 only. all others are auto or 00mv.
I have a 780i Board, and IT ONLY LETS YOU GO +MV there are NO -MV. It goes form +05mv to +100mv.
I also DO NOT SEE AN OPTION FOR VTT so what would I use for VTT?
I am looking to stabilize my QX9650 at 4.0-4.1 ghz. I would also like to lower the Vcore if possible (currently 1.45 set in bios)
What GTL VREF setting do I want to use for
GTL VREF 0
GTL VREF 1
GTL VREF 2
GTL VREF 3
???
What Vtt (vFSB) are you using? I'm not sure what the upper limit of Vref for the NB is but you'd have to be pushing very high Vtt to go beyond the safe limit.Quote:
Originally Posted by spoof
Do you have a voltage called vFSB? Vtt is another name for vFSB. if so what is it set too? It also depends what type of CPU you have, and how it specifically behaves. GTL's arent something where you can ask "what do I set it to" and have it be the same answer for everyone. You must experiment yourself to find the best settings. If you tell me your vFSB, I can tell you where to start from.Quote:
Originally Posted by Xenozx
EDIT - actually I'm not sure if nvidia chipsets call Vtt vFSB, if anyone knows what they call it can you chime in here pls.
Back to theory for a moment with a question...
Since the GTLs change the thresholds, I assume that they also change the timing of the clock signals by making the clock high/low at different points on the signals's edge slope?
So, (assuming that that is correct ;)) -- if I also change the timing directly using slew, do I need to recheck GTLs?
EDIT: do I need to retune GTLs?
As far as i know vNB and it's GTL are only MB related. Currently i'm using 1.36 VTT with 0.67x GTLREF, which is normal(and is < 1). But it turns out, that VTT and GTLREF doesn't fix the lockups. If you remember, i have lockup problem after 455Mhz. It didn't boot after 470Mhz, but with 0.63 GTLREF on the NB and 1.53 vNB it did it with 473, even was able to log into Vista(than it froze). So i think, that the value, which will help me fix the lockups is vNB+NB GTLREF. So, i'm not sure what are the safe borders. When it's vNB+NB GTLREF<=1, i'll not be able to run in with more than 465, but when it's more, may be i'll able to do it (after all, i'm under water, high voltage isn't the problem).Quote:
Originally Posted by CryptiK
It's not vNB + GTL = less than 1.0v, for the cpu anyway, it is Vtt x GTL Ref = less than 1.0v
Just keep playing with it you will find the sweet spot. However your board is not renowned for 450 - 480 FSB stability with a quad, I would be very surprised if it could do it.
These are the voltage settings in my bios.
http://techreport.com/r.x/nvidia-nfo...os-voltage.jpg
my exact settings for each one in order is
vcore 1.45625v
CPU FSB 1.4v
ram 2.125v
SPP 1.55v
CMP 1.55v
SPP - MCP 1.40v
Yes, i know that Vtt x GTLREF = less than 1.0v. I made mistake, i wanted to type vNB x GTLREF = something. So, if i run 1.53(vNB)x0.67(GTLREF for vNB) = 1,0251 there will be no problem?Quote:
Originally Posted by CryptiK
And, if i can do 470 FSB with P5E X48@Rampage Formula(0408), which board should not have problem with quad and high FSB?
Not sure on the first part tho it seems kinda high.Quote:
Originally Posted by spoof
For the question as to what board does decent FSB for a quad, my Asus P5Q Deluxe is doing well with my Q9400 at 486 fsb daily. Had it up to 490 fsb but it was getting a bit flakey and couldn't get er stable, could be the board/ my chip or just an oddball setting.
Larry
Is this true for the P45 also. From experimentation (system specs below). I was able to get stable at FSB 425 with vNB 1.28 and then drop one step to 1.27 by changing NB GTL to +30 from auto (aiming for about 0.67) and at 450 to drop again from 1.29 to 1.27 by going to +40 from +30. Each time I was stable (8h OCCT RAM) at the higher vNB and not at one step down, which became stable by altering the GTL up - whereas most posts here seem to suggest 0.58-0.6 is ideal GTL target for NB - which as I understand it would require a negative GTL offset as the default on this board is 0.64.Quote:
i agree with that guy too! nb gtlref calculation is not exactly a science, well even less so than the cpu counterpart. i have a few simple guidelines i follow when setting the nb gtlref value...
1. you will almost never need to use a higher value than cpu gtlref unless you are attempting to use fsb frequencies which don't want to be used! if thats the case change the fsb frequency it's an actual solution to your problem! its so much easier than jacking voltages all over the place to find stability when it's in fact hiding from you because it lies about its good looks and fun times to feel a sense of importance!
CPU is on auto/-40/auto/-40 aiming for 0.63 on all.
Confused!! :confused::confused:
Andy
What are the default multiplier settings for your board for the 4 GTL Ref's?Quote:
Originally Posted by Xenozx
It should say in your manual or in the bios when you highlight each one. For example on my board they are
GTL Ref 0 = 0.635x
GTL Ref 1 = 0.667x
GTL Ref 2 = 0.635x
GTL Ref 3 = 0.667x
Per the manual.
�� GTLVREF Lane 0
This function defines the voltage level for GTLVREF Lane 0. Use the Page
Up and Page Down keys to select a voltage or select [Auto]to automatically
set the voltage.
�� GTLVREF Lane 1
This function defines the voltage level for GTLVREF Lane 1. Use the Page
Up and Page Down keys to select a voltage or select [Auto]to automatically
set the voltage.
�� GTLVREF Lane 2
This function defines the voltage level for GTLVREF Lane 2. Use the Page
Up and Page Down keys to select a voltage or select [Auto]to automatically
set the voltage.
�� GTLVREF Lane 3
This function defines the voltage level for GTLVREF Lane 3. Use the Page
Up and Page Down keys to select a voltage or select [Auto]to automatically
set the voltage.
what does it mean when you can game, and do everything on your PC perfectly fine at say 4.2 ghz. can run 100 back to back cinebenchR10 quad core. but as soon as I launch prime 95, and start the torture test my computer BSOD's and reboots?
like, thats not the CPU failing is it? Is that a sign that more voltage is needed, the FSB is too high, bad memory, or what?
I think all boards do follow that general rule, as they all use clockgens which have preferred frequency multiples they produce from the base frequency of 33.33MHz. However if this thread has shown one thing, it's that GTL Ref requirements follow a general trend for each chip type (including the NB chips) but each individual chip differs, meaning you need to experiment and find exactly what your chip likes.Quote:
Originally Posted by powellandy
My NB on my M2F does not like anything over or under 0.64x, I lose stability if I change it from that. It appears yours behaves differently, and perhaps the fact you are running a quad alters its behaviour.
Not specific enough (not your fault its the manuals lack of info). You're going to have to do this blind. Try setting +50mv for all four of them. However when testing CPU GTL Ref settings you must be absolutely certain your ram & NB are stable, otherwise you will have no idea where errors are coming from if they occur.Quote:
Originally Posted by Xenozx
Fail small FFT's = usually CPU (but can be ram/board if theyre very unstable)Quote:
Originally Posted by Xenozx
Fail Large FFT's = usually ram/MCH unstable
Can you pass linpack? That is quite cpu oriented also. If you fail small FFT's, increase vcore or vFSB, tweak your GTL Ref's, or lower your cpu clock. if you fail large FFT's, increase vdimm or vNB, alter your timings, or lower your ram clock.
It's bizarre isn't it. I have now managed (with those GTL settings) - at 450MHz FSB - to get vFSB down to 1.27 and vNB down to 1.20 (the latter is much lower than that I needed at 425 - although the vFSB is higher). Just finished 13h OCCT RAM - the last 1h of which had FurMark running as well!Quote:
Originally Posted by CryptiK
Temps BTW where NB=61, SB=56, power=54 - so, again, I seem to be lucky at stable at higher temps than most.
Cheers,
Andy
Nice work, those are pretty high temps for only 1.2 vNB, I'm really surprised you're still stable. What are your ambients?
Did you find that BIOS 1501 helped gain stability with your quad compared to 1307?
They are aren't they - I am not sure why. I did the washer trick on the back screws (but that made at best 1-2oC difference anyway). I now have a 60mm fan blowing on the NB from a zalman bracket. Resting temps are case=38, NB=47, SB=50, CPU=42 (tjmax=100). Room temp is about 22.Quote:
Originally Posted by CryptiK
With OCCT Large (3.0.0b08) - NB=56,SB=54,CPU=66,case=41. When I add in FurMark with OCCT still going NB=60,SB=56,CPU=68,case=44.
I think the problem is I have the SupremeFX card, a modem and then the GPU (8800GTS) with stock cooling that runs 67 idle and 79 stressed in the first 3 slots so the NB is croweded by the cards (and CPU cooler) so that even with the 60mm fan the air is still hot there.
When I was stable at 425 I ended up with vFSB=1.20600 and vNB=1.27225 and still temps of NB=60 (before the 60mm fan) with OCCT. I am now at 450 with vFSB=1.27225 and vNB=1.20600 - I can only assume therefore that vNB and vFSB both contribute about equally to NB heat (especially with the heatpipe system) - I must say I never tried raising vFSB and lowering vNB at 425MHz.
I suppose at some point I should take the whole heatpipe assembly off and put some better TIM underneath and ensure it is all fitting OK as the temps are a little high. Although given I am stable at temps where most others seem to struggle I also ? the sensor - do you know where the vNB sensor is (ie. in chip, under heatsink etc.). I will try and get an external reading from the heatsink itself with a probe and see what it is.
I upgraded to 1501 when I was at 425 - with the settings I posted in the other thread - I was stable with these with both 1307 and 1501. I then went to 450 with 1501 - haven't been back to 1307. I tried 1602 but that crashed OCCT in 2 min with my higher voltage 450 settings - let alone these new ones. My SATAs are on 1,3,5 so I don't suffer from that problem with 1501 and I actually quite like it :).
Cheers,
Andy
edit
The question is can we damage something by setting extreme or wrong values of ITEM in our board (in GTLref equations)?
Also we know now that setting Vtt over Vcore is not the best idea ;)
THX
As many other people, I tend to understand the GTL parameter and how to set it, but at the same time I don't. :confused:
Currently, I've got my CPU and NB GTL+ values at 0.067 and I worked out the equation and it turns out it should 74mV, or the closest to thereof. Where would I set this? Or is it already set?
Btw, my VTT is at 1.303v.
Hm. FSB Vref perhaps?
From your sig, I see that you have a DFI. You set the GTLs differently. Unless you can find someone who has set up some detailed tables, its a real PITA. I finally took DFI's excel spreadsheet from their BIOS setting guide and created a sheet to interpolate between values to get what I want. And there're some mistakes in DFI's table that became apparent when I worked-out the interpolations. Try starting here: http://www.clunk.org.uk/forums/hardw...rboards-2.html
Cryptik!
This idea just crossed my mind while I was testing a 1Mhz FSB increase (478->479) to make sure it would be stable before changing in bios, and came up with this small experiment! Reason for testing, Raid5 on ICH9R is damn ficky, if you crash the system you can be up for a 5hr long array verification! Gah The ICH9R is horrible for Raid5 when it comes to rebuild/verify. Using 4x320Gb sata2 drives thought it would be fun to try out.
Check these linpack results out. I found them extremely interesting! What I think you'll find the most important is the variation in Gigaflops of processing done for the tests of the run. For 478MHz which I spent a good few hours fine tuning to perfection the processing work done for each problem are +-1GFlop of each other. Then I set the FSB only 2MHz higher and suddenly they are all out of whack! Seems like a fine example of how critical tuning the Vtt and GTL References can be. At 478MHz the performance appears to be right at the edge of peak performance, where as 480MHz it drops significantly.
See next post for methodology, data and results.
Apps used:
Intel Linpack Benchmark 10.1.0018 64bit Binary
SetFSB 2.8.15 (change FSB on the fly)
CPU-Z (to verify changes to FSB)
Goal:
To show variations in CPU average processing power as a result of CPU and NB GTL Reference voltage and Vtt (AGTL+ Logical High Termination Voltage) fine tuned for a specific Front Side Bus BCLK frequency.
To show the importance GTL Ref and Vtt values have for a small band of FSB BCLK frequencies and where the values go outside their tuned range.
Method:
Start with fine tuned values for 478MHz FSB BCLK and only make changes to FSB BCLK frequency through SetFSB App in Windows. No changes made to GTL Ref or Vtt, and system not rebooted for the duration of all tests so base values are constant.
Data:
Common Linpack Data for all runs.
Parameters are set to:
Number of tests : 2
Number of equations to solve (problem size) : 2000 14000
Leading dimension of array : 2008 14008
Number of trials to run : 6 4
Data alignment value (in Kbytes) : 4 4
Maximum memory requested that can be used = 1569180256, at the size = 14000
480MHz FSB Vtt & CPU/NB GTL Ref Fine Tuned for 478MHz
Current date/time: Tue Dec 16 20:42:57 2008
CPU frequency: 4.317 GHz
Number of CPUs: 4
Number of threads: 4
============= Timing linear equation system solver =================
Size LDA Align. Time(s) GFlops Residual Residual(norm)
2000 2008 4 0.153 34.9357 4.657913e-012 4.051814e-002
2000 2008 4 0.159 33.5925 4.657913e-012 4.051814e-002
2000 2008 4 0.306 17.4794 4.657913e-012 4.051814e-002
2000 2008 4 0.167 31.8933 4.657913e-012 4.051814e-002
2000 2008 4 0.198 26.9641 4.657913e-012 4.051814e-002
2000 2008 4 0.172 31.0537 4.657913e-012 4.051814e-002
14000 14008 4 47.447 38.5635 1.832709e-010 3.309677e-002
14000 14008 4 45.706 40.0328 1.832709e-010 3.309677e-002
14000 14008 4 47.151 38.8055 1.832709e-010 3.309677e-002
----------
479MHz FSB FSB Vtt & CPU/NB GTL Ref Fine Tuned for 478MHz
Current date/time: Tue Dec 16 20:59:07 2008
CPU frequency: 4.310 GHz
Number of CPUs: 4
Number of threads: 4
============= Timing linear equation system solver =================
Size LDA Align. Time(s) GFlops Residual Residual(norm)
2000 2008 4 0.153 35.0199 4.657913e-012 4.051814e-002
2000 2008 4 0.151 35.4635 4.657913e-012 4.051814e-002
2000 2008 4 0.153 34.9244 4.657913e-012 4.051814e-002
2000 2008 4 0.156 34.3377 4.657913e-012 4.051814e-002
2000 2008 4 0.167 31.9228 4.657913e-012 4.051814e-002
2000 2008 4 0.162 32.9649 4.657913e-012 4.051814e-002
14000 14008 4 41.460 44.1328 1.832709e-010 3.309677e-002
14000 14008 4 41.545 44.0422 1.832709e-010 3.309677e-002
14000 14008 4 41.439 44.1550 1.832709e-010 3.309677e-002
14000 14008 4 41.177 44.4351 1.832709e-010 3.309677e-002
Performance Summary (GFlops)
Size LDA Align. Average Maximal
2000 2008 4 34.1055 35.4635
14000 14008 4 44.1913 44.4351
----------
478MHz FSB Vtt & CPU/NB GTL Ref Fine Tuned for 478MHz
Current date/time: Tue Dec 16 20:47:36 2008
CPU frequency: 4.303 GHz
Number of CPUs: 4
Number of threads: 4
============= Timing linear equation system solver =================
Size LDA Align. Time(s) GFlops Residual Residual(norm)
2000 2008 4 0.153 34.8233 4.657913e-012 4.051814e-002
2000 2008 4 0.154 34.7176 4.657913e-012 4.051814e-002
2000 2008 4 0.153 34.8557 4.657913e-012 4.051814e-002
2000 2008 4 0.158 33.8543 4.657913e-012 4.051814e-002
2000 2008 4 0.161 33.2057 4.657913e-012 4.051814e-002
2000 2008 4 0.152 35.1761 4.657913e-012 4.051814e-002
14000 14008 4 41.286 44.3187 1.832709e-010 3.309677e-002
14000 14008 4 41.152 44.4622 1.832709e-010 3.309677e-002
14000 14008 4 41.205 44.4057 1.832709e-010 3.309677e-002
14000 14008 4 41.196 44.4150 1.832709e-010 3.309677e-002
Performance Summary (GFlops)
Size LDA Align. Average Maximal
2000 2008 4 34.4388 35.1761
14000 14008 4 44.4004 44.4622
----------
477MHz FSB Vtt and CPU/NB GTL Ref Fine Tuned for 478MHz
Current date/time: Tue Dec 16 21:04:53 2008
CPU frequency: 4.295 GHz
Number of CPUs: 4
Number of threads: 4
============= Timing linear equation system solver =================
Size LDA Align. Time(s) GFlops Residual Residual(norm)
2000 2008 4 0.155 34.3763 4.657913e-012 4.051814e-002
2000 2008 4 0.160 33.3560 4.657913e-012 4.051814e-002
2000 2008 4 0.164 32.5663 4.657913e-012 4.051814e-002
2000 2008 4 0.163 32.8286 4.657913e-012 4.051814e-002
2000 2008 4 0.158 33.8674 4.657913e-012 4.051814e-002
2000 2008 4 0.153 35.0250 4.657913e-012 4.051814e-002
14000 14008 4 43.229 42.3267 1.832709e-010 3.309677e-002
14000 14008 4 43.619 41.9483 1.832709e-010 3.309677e-002
14000 14008 4 43.038 42.5139 1.832709e-010 3.309677e-002
14000 14008 4 41.981 43.5841 1.832709e-010 3.309677e-002
Performance Summary (GFlops)
Size LDA Align. Average Maximal
2000 2008 4 33.6699 35.0250
14000 14008 4 42.5933 43.5841
----------
476MHz FSB Vtt and CPU/NB GTL Ref Fine Tuned for 478MHz
Current date/time: Tue Dec 16 21:09:24 2008
CPU frequency: 4.288 GHz
Number of CPUs: 4
Number of threads: 4
============= Timing linear equation system solver =================
Size LDA Align. Time(s) GFlops Residual Residual(norm)
2000 2008 4 0.152 35.0469 4.657913e-012 4.051814e-002
2000 2008 4 0.190 28.0832 4.657913e-012 4.051814e-002
2000 2008 4 0.151 35.3378 4.657913e-012 4.051814e-002
2000 2008 4 0.152 35.0894 4.657913e-012 4.051814e-002
2000 2008 4 0.156 34.1345 4.657913e-012 4.051814e-002
2000 2008 4 0.151 35.3888 4.657913e-012 4.051814e-002
14000 14008 4 41.073 44.5480 1.832709e-010 3.309677e-002
14000 14008 4 41.429 44.1658 1.832709e-010 3.309677e-002
14000 14008 4 41.225 44.3841 1.832709e-010 3.309677e-002
14000 14008 4 42.916 42.6351 1.832709e-010 3.309677e-002
Performance Summary (GFlops)
Size LDA Align. Average Maximal
2000 2008 4 33.8468 35.3888
14000 14008 4 43.9332 44.5480
----------
475MHz FSB Vtt and CPU/NB GTL Ref Fine Tuned for 478MHz
Current date/time: Tue Dec 16 21:17:05 2008
CPU frequency: 4.274 GHz
Number of CPUs: 4
Number of threads: 4
============= Timing linear equation system solver =================
Size LDA Align. Time(s) GFlops Residual Residual(norm)
2000 2008 4 0.157 33.9416 4.657913e-012 4.051814e-002
2000 2008 4 0.154 34.7686 4.657913e-012 4.051814e-002
2000 2008 4 0.153 34.9108 4.657913e-012 4.051814e-002
2000 2008 4 0.155 34.4649 4.657913e-012 4.051814e-002
2000 2008 4 0.154 34.7279 4.657913e-012 4.051814e-002
2000 2008 4 0.153 34.9343 4.657913e-012 4.051814e-002
14000 14008 4 42.058 43.5045 1.832709e-010 3.309677e-002
14000 14008 4 41.602 43.9819 1.832709e-010 3.309677e-002
14000 14008 4 42.059 43.5038 1.832709e-010 3.309677e-002
14000 14008 4 41.546 44.0413 1.832709e-010 3.309677e-002
Performance Summary (GFlops)
Size LDA Align. Average Maximal
2000 2008 4 34.6247 34.9343
14000 14008 4 43.7579 44.0413
----------
Results:
To come.
I'll try and graph this up in excel to show a trend and simplify the data collected!
Apps used:
Intel Linpack Benchmark 10.1.0018 64bit Binary
SetFSB 2.8.15 (change FSB on the fly)
CPU-Z (to verify changes to FSB)
Goal:
To show variations in CPU average processing power as a result of CPU and NB GTL Reference voltage and Vtt (AGTL+ Logical High Termination Voltage) fine tuned for a specific Front Side Bus BCLK frequency.
To show the importance GTL Ref and Vtt values have for a small band of FSB BCLK frequencies and where the values go outside their tuned range.
Method:
Start with fine tuned values for 478MHz FSB BCLK and only make changes to FSB BCLK frequency through SetFSB App in Windows. No changes made to GTL Ref or Vtt, and system not rebooted for the duration of all tests so base values are constant.
Results:
To come.
Edit: Argh hard locked the system and now Raid5 array in verify state. Will add more FSB runs once it's done. So probably tomorrow at best. Should have disabled write-back caching before I started.
That is incredibly interesting! Nice find noticing that. Very strange how it seems absolutely spot on at 478 MHz, then becoming increasingly inconsistent slightly below and above that point and even decreasing despite the increase in FSB! 476 MHz and 480 MHz look to be the most affected. Were those Gflops readings reproducible in a consistent fashion upon re-running? How accurate do you think Linpack is in terms of processing work quantification? I guess so long as it's consistent it need not be accurate per se, as its just comparison of settings relative to each other.
Perhaps this may be shown through further testing to be the most suitable method to fine tune GTL Ref settings for specific FSB & clocks, beyond simply using them for gaining raw stability. I will also look into this in the next couple of days.
Sorry to hear about your raid array, 5 hours verification must be painful.
Quote:
Originally Posted by mikeyakame
yep i can get the same results within 0.1-0.2glfop consistently. if i change even Vcc or Vnb one notch it upsets it also! The variation should be very small if its setup correctly! I know when there is something out, i'll get anywhere from 35-42gflop across the 4 tests, thats how I figured out a way to use it for fine tuning. Near perfect gtl and voltages gives near perfect consistency and output, kinda like an engine thats balanced and works on very tight tolerances it'll perform the same day to day without a hitch.
I noticed a similar variation when searching for the correct GTLs. It didn't occur to me to try to use it for tuning!
So, you're suggesting that for a specific set of voltages, the GTLs that give me that max GFLOPs/min Times in LinPak (over several trials -- I usually run 15 before switching to prime95) is the sweet spot? That I should tune for that? See if it's stable and if not, move on?
Now that you mentioned this sweetspot and GTL's doing changes on Gflops here some old pics that i have stored.
http://www.aijaa.com/img/b/00813/3264988.jpg
and now today whit 0.635x GTL's
http://www.aijaa.com/img/b/00134/3264994.jpg
yeah you should be able to ;) just make sure you use the same problem size for all tests. you can use two different ones, ie like I do, small problem and large problem, just as long as the config is consistent for all the testing runs.Quote:
Originally Posted by davidk21770
That's how I've always tuned GTL for unknown FSBs heh I just figured others realized the same! I guess it's not as obvious as it looks to me!
Gives me a good idea, and usually if you get it right in Linpack..Prime95 should pass with flying colours provided you haven't hit an FSB Wall on the chip! Usually Linpack picks up the Wall before Prime anyway...nothing says wall more than a hard system lock that can't be tuned around!
Quote:
Originally Posted by mikeyakame
:up: I never thought of doing this! Thank you for that. Have not adjusted my Cpu GTL's this way but I just adjusted my NB GTL from .650 to .655 and shaved my time off about .19 and Gflops went up .21.Nice :)
Larry
I have noticed the variation in work throughput and noticed when I had the GTL Refs spot on that the Gflops were very similar within a run, but by the time I noticed I had my system tuned almost perfectly. It's probably a good idea to use this in addition to other methods to get the GTL Refs tuned for the particular FSB.
Quote:
Originally Posted by mikeyakame
I've found the more accurate linpack results are and smaller mean overall it reflects in all the system behaviour. Everything just seems to work in a smoother fashion which would be explained by the CPU being able to maximize its throughput efficiently.
Other thing I find is if the work output is say 35gflop at same freq cause the clock waves are out of whack, the peak temp on any core in linpack will generally be 10c+ lower by the end. After 4 runs with 1.6gb problems on the 64bit binary, I see a couple of cores hit ~81c when its running smooth.
Other thing is in Vista you need to make sure that with Linpack running there is no more than 80% memory usage or it'll start swapping out and screw up the results!
hi folks, i've a trouble with some GTLs
i've correctly settled my 1/3 GTLs (vFSB 1.25 x 0.635 = 0.793) - (vFSB 1.25 x 0.667 = 0.833) = -0.040mV but if i only touch the 0/2 GTL (now on AUTO) i can't boot ...
now i'm running 4500mhz (450 fsb, 1.54 vPLL, 1.25 vCC, 1.40 vNB, 1.25 vFSB - SB @ default) onto my MIIF ... and passed Linpack successfully ...
someone can give me a tip about those GTLs?
TIA (and merry xamas!)
any settings for the 780i with q9450 around 3,6-3,8 ghz
got new 780i board and old settings cant keep me running for more than 20 min
cpuv 1.5 yes i tried less but last board needed 1.5vcore new one is as stable 20min @ 1.38 as it is with @ 1.52 no v-drop pencile mode yet
vtt 1.3 1.2 wount chanfe the fail time
ddr 2.1
nb 1.4 tried 1.45 to 1.3
sb 1.5 @ stock tried up to 1.6
nb to sb 1.30 stock is 1.2 but it never matters unless it is above 1.4
lane 0 +.45 ive messed with these settings for 2 days with no love other than this gives me 20 ish minutes and every thing else is respectivley worse
lane 1 +.45
lane 2 +.05
lane 3 +.05
Hi Kurtz,Quote:
Originally Posted by KURTZ
With you vtt I would start with 10/-30/10/-30 which gives you almost perfect 0.8v on all GTLs and then you can go up.
From my experience this board (at least mine) really likes High GTLs from bracket 0.9v and up to 0.98v.
If you want to aim for GTL refs like this try 100/70/100/70 for 0.9 and work your way up - you might be surprised when you will find that you got best results with >0.95v ...
If you want to try 0.95v then settings are 150/110/150/110 or 150/120/150/120 (for me best results yield setting when 1/3 are a bit higher then 0/2 - I am talking about actual gtlrefs values not settings for them in bios)
Cheers - dont be affraid of high numbers they are all in spec of CPU and MB - the lower vtt the higher correction numbers and your vtt is vlow in compare to quads i. e.
thx mate, your post is really clear :)Quote:
Originally Posted by seban
however i've another question about the NB GTL:
the formula is the same than the other (vFSB x 0.64 = result - in that case 0.768) so i need to set the NB GTL like the GTL 0/2 or the GTL 1/3 correct? so if i follow your example and i want to put ALL my GTL to 0.8v i need to set +34mV onto the NB GTL correct?
TIA and merry xamas!
No problem m8 glad I can help.Quote:
Originally Posted by KURTZ
Well some time ago I was also wondering if I should set (just as you my friend) same GTL NB value as I am using for CPU GTL but I am not sure if it does the trick.
When I was tweaking NB GLT for the very first time I just set it to the same value as CPU GTL (I was at about 0.9v for CPU so I did same thing for NB) but it did not work. So I was just upping gradually NB GTL and stoped at one which gave me best resoults which was +60 at my vtt at that time in the past.
Then I fine tuned CPU GTLrefs. In the end CPU GTLrefs after fine tuning are almost the same as NBGTL ref which is working for me - so it looks like there is a correlation but also it might be just a coincidence.
I was lucky enough that I had problem that was solved by fine tuning NB GTL ref so I knew exactly when I set it to correct value.
If you want to have same effect just downgrade you vNB from your stable one by 2-3 notches to make it not stable and than fine tune NBtlref so you should see when it gets stable again and which NBGtl values is working for you.
K back to supper :)
You are going to have to drop the clock to where you are stable (eg: 3.4GHz) and slowly work up. Each board can behave quite differently from the last, even though the are the same model. There is no way you should need 1.5 vcore for those clocks, drop it to around 1.4v, Vtt 1.3v, vPLL 1.55v, and get it stable at lower clocks then work up. Each time it gets unstable after a small increase, work out what is required for it to be stable.Quote:
Originally Posted by billdavis
In your previous post I think you've got the GTL Refs around the wrong way. GTL Ref 0 & 2 = 0.635x and 1 & 3 = 0.67x.Quote:
Originally Posted by KURTZ
So your settings should look something like this for example:
GTL Ref 0 = +50mv
GTL Ref 1 = +10mv
GTL Ref 2 = +50mv
GTL Ref 3 = +10mv
Your NB GTL Ref has nothing to do with the CPU GTL Refs. The NB is a separate chip and needs it's GTL Ref set for whatever it specifically needs. For the M2F this is usually between -50mv and +60mv.
yes Cryptik but you told me that if i want i can change the 1/3 gtls or the 0/2 gtls ...
so i can put this settings:
GTL Ref 0 = +30mv
GTL Ref 1 = -10mv
GTL Ref 2 = +30mv
GTL Ref 3 = -10mv
cause i've the same result ... correct?
Yes that's fine, I just misunderstood one of your previous posts :) Very nice result you got btw.Quote:
Originally Posted by KURTZ
no mate, it's my poor english ... :) however thanks :)
Cryp,
Want to edit the first post and put a note about the naming and meaning of the CPU gtl ref land pin assignment names. Seems lot of people confused by their actual meaning and setting them in wrong context.
Something like this maybe.
CPU GTL Reference (0/2 Lane0/Lane2)
GTL Reference Data Strobe Input Buffer Middle/End Landing Pins 0 & 2. (GTLREF0/GTLREF2)
CPU GTL Reference (1/3 Lane1/Lane3)
GTL Reference Address Strobe Input Buffer Middle/End Landing Pins 1 & 3 ( GTLREF1/GTLREF3 )
For quad-core multi-die chips.
Middle Landing Pins (GTLREF0/1) act as input buffer for DIE0, End Landing Pins ( GTLREF2/3 ) act as input buffer for DIE1.
For dual core single-die chips.
Middle Landing Pin (GTLREF0/1) acts as input buffer for DIE0, End Landing Pin (GTLREF2/3) uncertain if used. Either unused and terminated to open drain Vtt or used as reference for middle pins as margin of error.
Address strobe Pins (GTLREF1/3) will generally tolerate small variance with respect to reference voltage accuracy, and should in most cases be setup a little lower with respect to Data strobe Reference multiplier or voltage.
Why?
Probably the same reason as any other reference or input voltage for clock strobes, signal resonance or cross talking.
Data strobe pins (GTLREF0/2) will not tolerate being out by more than 0.5-1% below nominal, but will tolerate slightly more above nominal. Keep set values above Address Strobe GTL multiplier/voltage offset.
Why?
Works better in almost all situations, don't know why until I get a chance to monitor on a logic analyzer.
By How Much?
Varies according to FSB base clock, higher the FSB BCLK the smaller the difference will probably need to be at least with respect to the Diff Amplitude driving the clock.
EOF
On a side note I'm going to try and see if a mate can get me access to a Logic Analyzer and the software to analyze and overlay the samples, provided I can figure out the board locations to measure the signals... I don't really even know where to start but my friend is a circuit board designer so hopefully he'll be able to work it out. Fingers crossed anyway.