Printable View
RunawayPrisoner, I too noticed something weird withQuote:
Originally Posted by RunawayPrisoner
Real temp and Core temp, is real temp actually showing it more correct?
There is like a 10C difference between them, Coretemp being 10C higher,
both Real Temp and Bios show a lot lower temps
It's due to the way Intel CPUs report their temperatures. As stated in the Real Temp thread, Core Temp assumes the TJMax on these chips is 105C, whereas they were 95C in reality, thus... when you put 95C as their TJMax, that's an effective 10C drop in temperature readings. But even then, that might not be accurate, as there might be 2-3C error in the sensors. The only way to fix it is via the Idle Temperature Calibration options. "--" is perfect for 45nm processors and "++" is perfect for 65nm processors. Either of them will effect your load temperatures. The load temperatures stay the same, anyway. Those "--" and "++" options just display accurate idle temperatures.Quote:
Originally Posted by lv_88
Nice results so far. I've got a Q9450 and a 790i on the way, I'll post how I do when they get here.
[QUOTE=sbinh;2886259]This is what I current have on mine ... 3.6GHz
vcore: 1.2500v
vPLL: 1.6
vdimm: 2.15v
vFSB: 1.4v
vNB: 1.55v
vSB: 1.05v
FSB: 450
RAM: 1124 (OCZ PC2-8500)
Load line Calibration: Enable
Hi sbinh,
My Q9450 is running very stable at 3.4Ghz but I have "Load line Calibration set to Disable"
Would you mind explaining to me what this is and if it has any effect on OC'ing?
Also I tried to push mine to 3.6Ghz but then it was no longer stable therefore took it back down to 3.4Ghz.
Your thoughts?
Vio|37
Hi Natalia,Quote:
Originally Posted by Natalia
Would you mind posting your voltage settings and temps for me?
Thanking you in advance.
Vio|37
Quote:
Originally Posted by RunawayPrisoner
Runawayprisoner,
I am getting the same results as you. 1.344 seems it. Is this what you are putting into the bios? I experience a Vdroop on my board but core loading voltage is 1.344 in CPUZ.
[QUOTE=viol37;2891335]Quote:
Originally Posted by sbinh
This is what I got from anandtech forum:
(http://www.anandtech.com/printarticle.aspx?i=3156)
Hope that would help.Quote:
Originally Posted by www.anandtech.com
It was 1.3500v in the BIOS. That's as far as I can get the thing. 490 to be more precise. Any higher than that, and the board just... freezes.Quote:
Originally Posted by Delirious.
freezing... hmmm... isn't that usually RAM-related?
Hello, I just put together my q9450 w/ Asus rampage formula. Haven't had much time to do anything but install Windows and basics and I'm at work so everything is stock.
My mobo and the Asus software utility report my CPU temp to be around 28 C while core temp reports it to be around 48 C idle. I have a Noctua NH-U12P heatsink fan. I would have thought my idle temps would be lower than 48 C, do I just suck at putting heatsinks on? Also, the core 1 and 2 on core temp fluctuate immediately with each other and same with core 3 and 4 so that just doesn't seem right to me.
Also, I don't know much about this TJMax thing but core temp is reporting it to be 135 C.
I just recieved my Q9450 retail.:up:
The "batchnumber" (on wafer) ends with 3A0101.
I've read somewhere that a low number is better than a higher one?
Oh, well...give me 1 hour and I can tell you.:D
After all this reading on so many sites, I don't think that the X3350 or Q9450 has a problem with low FSB I think it all boils down to what motherboard and Bios you are running. I can't get my X3350 to be stable beyond 425. I wish everyone that doesn't have there specs in there sig with the current bios would do so.
my 2 cents.
So you're saying a G35 is better than a X38 at clocking this chip? :p:
And by the way, my chip ended with 4A758 just FYI. I don't think low numbers have anything to do with the clockability of the chip... but we can all hope. :up:
Hmm, it turned out to be a real dog.Quote:
Originally Posted by Clint
I need to feed it 1.35v to get stable at 3.2GHz, and it won't even boot at 3.6GHz no matter what....POS chip.:down:
No FSB wall though, boots at 470MHz but after that mobo can't handle it anyway.
Oh well, away it goes.
Ahh... not another dud? That sucks... seriously.
Yup, it won't even do 3GHz on stock voltage.:ROTF:Quote:
Originally Posted by RunawayPrisoner
There is a small possibility it is the PSU though, It's just too crappy results for it to be only the CPU.
I will know in a day or two.:D
Hopefully. :) Gee, and it makes me wonder why I got such a nice chip. Even stock volts were overkill for 3.2GHz. :p:
Received my X3350 yesterday. Did a brief test at 3.2GHz. Seems stable @ 3.2G 1.2125v set in bios, 1.152v under load (prime95 smallfft ) in windows. Will try 3.6G tonight.
Good luck. Seems like you got a nice chip. :) What's the batch number?
Well, I finally got mine up a little higher but it required some serious voltage to do so... 455 is the highest I can get the FSB Prime Blend stable. 460 will fail 1 or 2 cores after max 5 mins and 470 will just freeze as soon as I set it with SetFSB.
But so far 455x8 for 3640MHz on the CPU seems stable on air with these voltages:
CPU: 1.45V (reads 1.472V in CPU-Z)
NB: 1.66V
CPU_VTT: 1.603V
Mem: 2.19V
GTL 1/2: 120
GTL 0/3: 119
GTL NB: 120
Tomorrow I'll try some gaming with Supreme Commander and World in Conflict to see how it handles it at these speeds.
And in the next couple of days I'll throw on the Vapo LS to see what some freezing temps will do to this chip! :up:
L803A756, OEM X3350 from lagoom.Quote:
Originally Posted by RunawayPrisoner
Yes... seems like Lagoom really DOES get the nice chips in. Raid the place, guys! :p:
If you guys drop the multi to 6x, can you get the fsb higher? Or is it an fsb limitation of the chip?
It's the FSB limitation of the board, to be more precise. It's got to be a very good board, or one that is very poweful (a.k.a. can withstand insane voltages) to be able to hold a quad at very high FSBs.
I think it's more an FSB limitation of the CPU. On my old E6600 I was limited to 430 when it was on air but when I put it under the Vapo LS I could do 478 stable.