not bad Bex :)...1090T 1015EPMW, stock cooling, 4170 MHz wprime 1024M ,-)
Printable View
not bad Bex :)...1090T 1015EPMW, stock cooling, 4170 MHz wprime 1024M ,-)
CPU Model: AMD Phenom II X6 1075T
CPU Stepping: -
CPU Frequency: 3840 MHz
CPU vCore: 1.375V
CPU Multiplier: 15x
CPU Turbo: Disabled
CPU NB Speed: 2304 MHz
HT Ref Speed: 2304 MHz
RAM Speed: DDR2-800
RAM Timings: 5-5-5-15-20-2t
RAM Configuration: 4 GB (2 x 2 GB)
RAM vDIMM: 1.98V
Motherboard: GIGABYTE GA-MA770-UD3
Chipset/Socket: AM2+, 770 + SB700
Cooling: Water (TT BIgwater SE)
Temps: 23C Idle / 49C Load
Operating System: Windows 7 Ultimate
32/64-Bit: 64
Stable/Suicide/Untested: Stable
http://img26.imageshack.us/img26/234...5t3840mhzs.png
Uploaded with ImageShack.us
Found 1hr run of my 1010MPMW Thuban @ 4GHz 1.33V, real one should be around 1.34V, but I can't recall...
http://b.imagehost.org/0650/4GHz.png
According to this post the ambient was 21C.
Hi fellow Thuban overclockers! I just wanted to say thank you for this overclocking chart. This is very valuable information for beginners like me. I recently switched from a 980X / 1366 system to fully-watercooled 1090T / AM3 one and having no prior AM3 overclocking experience, I have a lot to catch up on. But so far, I am very pleasantly surprised by how much easier it is to OC and manage stable clocks than on the i7 processors (I have tried an 860, 875K, 920 and 980X). Much more predictable, in that from what I have seen until now, if it doesn't crash within an hour of Prime95 Small FFT / BOINC (Einstein@Home + Milkyway@home) then it won't crash 20 hours later, like it happened on the i7.
I'm sorry I'm not contributing much right now, but I will soon. After a whole afternoon of trial and error:
- Model: 1090T (CCBBE CB 1022BPMW)
- Clock: 4.01 GHz (200 x 20)
- vCore: 1.3375V
- Stress test: 1 hour of Prime95 Small FFT, and then a couple hours of BOINC (still running)
- Temperatures (with the CPU, motherboard and GPUs -- 5970 at stock -- in the same WC loop, all crunching in parallel):
--- CPU socket = 50°C
--- CPU cores = 39°C
--- GPUs = 47°C
--- NB = 41°C
--- SB = 41°C
Northbridge and RAM at their minimum so that they don't interfere (ridiculously low frequencies like 800 MHz and 400 MHz, respectively).
Also, I found that the Load Line Calibration setting has a significant impact on stability at a given vCore. For example, at 4 GHz (200 x 20), with LLC = Auto (off I guess) it still wasn't stable at 1.4125V even though I didn't see it fluctuate in CPU-Z, while the same vCore with LLC on it was stable (or at least lasted a lot longer under stress load) but was a also hotter, CPU socket jumped from about 44°C to 55°C. From there I was able to dial it down to 1.3375V (no less since it crashed within ~15 minutes at 1.325V).
I look forward to overclocking the CPU-northbridge, as from what I gathered it has a greater influence on general performance and snappiness than CPU frequency... And that's a new parameter to play with compared to the i7 :).
I'm still not clear on the HT-link though. Should it be clocked the same as the CPU-NB? How does it influence performance?
LLC is sort of a double-edged sword regardless of if it's on an Intel or AMD board. What LLC does is overvolt to attempt to compensate for droop under load. Depending on the board, it might overshoot quite a bit. As a consequence though, your CPU will definitely be more stable. Just be careful that it isn't stable because it's being fed 1.6V when you've set it to 1.525V.
Yes, overclocking the CPU NB will improve overall system performance. This frequency determines your L3 cache speed and also impacts your memory controller. 2.6~3.0 GHz is a pretty standard overclock range for this parameter. It defaults to 2 GHz on all models.
Don't worry about the HT link. Just keep it as close to 2GHz as you can for stability reasons. This is the link between the northbridge on the chipset and the CPU. Since there isn't exactly a lot of bandwidth needed, you're fine with whatever. Not hardly a benefit to risking stability for the sake of pumping it up high.
A CPU doing 4GHz at 1.34V stable is sort of rare, so I'd very much advise you to check what you're actually getting with a DMM. It might be delivering quite a bit more than you expect due to LLC. Also be mindful that it's definitely still possible that you'd crash after 20 hours if 1 hour of small FFT is alright. No platform is going to be able to save you from extensive testing. In any case though, I'm glad you're having fun. I'm curious what prompted you to jump onto a 1090T from a 980X. By all rights, the 980X is faster.
@Particle
Thanks for such a comprehensive response! Greatly appreciated. You have cleared up major points I was wondering about.
You're right. With Intel processors I could see the vCore fluctuate in CPU-Z, that's not the case anymore with this AMD but that doesn't mean it's actually constant. Your explanation prompted me to install ASUS's flaky-looking PC Probe II and it seems to show more accurate voltages as I see the vCore fluctuate with utilization.Quote:
Originally Posted by Particle
I was testing 4200 MHz at 200 x 21, 1.4V with LLC on. When running Prime95 Small FFT, CPU-Z was showing a constant 1.4V while Probe II displayed 1.52V! Shutting down Prime95 brings it down to 1.40V with peaks at 1.45V.
So thanks for warning me about this!
Ha, excellent. With the CPU back down to 4.0 GHz, I will be aiming at a 3.0 GHz CPU-NB then :up:.Quote:
Originally Posted by Particle
Perfect, that's one less thing to worry about.Quote:
Originally Posted by Particle
Given the behaviour described above, I will definitely pay attention to the actual tension values from now on.Quote:
Originally Posted by Particle
OK. That was too good to be true, I will see how it goes once I will have settled for "hours stable" clocks, testing those for a whole 24 hours.Quote:
Originally Posted by Particle
I loved overclocking Intel processors, AMD ones are equally as fun, I have no regrets regarding the switch from a 980X. I switched because I wanted to sell the 980X while it was still worth the same amount of money I paid for it (second hand already), before it was too late. It's a beast that was worth trying out but its value is becoming volatile with Sandy Bridge and the upcomnig 2011 socket high-end processors, so it was risky to keep it. The money leftover was to go into fully watercooling my system (at the time I had a GPU-only loop and a leftover 560 to fit in a FT-02), so buying a used 920-950 would have been the obious option, only there existed no full-cover waterblock for my motherboard (X58A-UD3R), so I would have had to buy a new one too. Since there was an EK waterblock for both the Crosshair III and IV Formula, and the CH3F fitted my requirements (no glued-on USB3, cheap SATA6, unused crappy onboard audio, same amount of PCI-E lanes as 890FX) and I could get the corresponding EK waterblock for a bargain price, I was dead set on moving to a "cheap" CH3F + 1090T + waterblocks :). (Sorry for the long response :rolleyes:.)Quote:
Originally Posted by Particle
Is it worth going to an 1100T from a 1090T? Does anyone know what's the major difference other than a higher stock multi?
Given the price difference for a +0.5 default multiplier increase, one would think the 1100T is binned higher than the 1090T but I have yet to see this confirmed.Quote:
Originally Posted by DexNfX
If your 1090T is already doing alright, an 1100T probably isn't going to be a notable improvement (if any at all).
Guess I'll just wait to see what Bulldozer has to offer then.
After a time consuming trial and error, I finally achieved 4 Ghz stable for a night:
- CPU Model: AMD Phenom II X6 1090T BE
- CPU Stepping: CCBBE CB 1022BPMW
- CPU Frequency: 4000 MHz
- CPU vCore: 1.425V (LLC off)
- CPU Multiplier: 20x
- CPU Turbo: Disabled
- CPU NB Speed: 2800 MHz
- HT Ref Speed: 200 MHz
- RAM Speed: DDR3-1333
- RAM Timings: 5-5-5-15-1T
- RAM Configuration: 4 GB (2 x 2 GB)
- RAM vDIMM: 1.5635V
- Motherboard: ASUS Crosshair III Formula
- Chipset/Socket: AM3, 790FX + SB750
- Cooling: Watercooling (Black Ice SR-1 560 with CPU, GPU and MB in the loop)
- Temps: 36°C Load (cores as reported by Core Temp, haven't checked the socket temperature yet)
- Operating System: Windows 7
- 32/64-Bit: 64
- Stable/Suicide/Untested: Stable
Stable = Tested stable for almost 9 hours of BOINC (Einstein@Home) with Prime95 Small FFT running the the background, picking up BOINC's leftovers.
http://img195.imageshack.us/img195/1...2001425.th.png http://img543.imageshack.us/img543/1...01425nb.th.png
With the exact same stress test, vCore one notch lower (1.4125V), it crashed (BOINC's processes stopped and some Prime95 workers stopped) in the middle of the night yesterday. At 1.425V, it has survived the whole night. We'll see tonight if it's still running, and I will take the opportunity to report the CPU socket temperature.
As much as I like this constant 4 GHz overclock, I would have preferred to take advantage of the Turbo CORE feature, at something like 3.8 .. 4.2 GHz but even at 3.7 .. 4.1 GHz, it was unstable on a single active core at 1.45V so I have little hope.
I'm beginning to wonder if the mysterious CPU VDDA setting could have an inpact on high multipliers? Isn't it like the CPU PLL on Intel? If I remember correctly, increasing it helped with 30+ multipliers, maybe it would be the case on Thubans with 20+ multipliers. Has anyone experimented with it?
Also, I tried to reach the golden 3000 MHz CPU-NB clock with several HT Ref. speeds, without success, but in a weird way. After increasing the CPU-NB voltage several times, I was able to have it stable for about 1 hour of Prime95 Blend, but 1 time out of 4, it wouldn't post after rebooting (on purpose), telling me the overclock has failed. So 3000 MHz prevents it from booting 1 time out of 4 but once in Windows, it appears to be stable!? I would have thought if it can pass this long of Prime95, posting should never be a problem. Is 3000 a limit for the Crosshair III Formula?
Updated
Thanks :up:.Quote:
Originally Posted by Particle
Coming back from work, my PC was still crunching for Einstein@Home and Prime95 had no stopped workers. So that's 23h stable. The CPU socket is at 52°C as reported by HWMonitor (left) while Core Temp indicates 36°C for the CPU cores (right):Quote:
Originally Posted by Roman2K
http://img29.imageshack.us/img29/718...1425cpu.th.png
where did you get that widget to show the cpu usage? i have one like it but, just says intel, lolQuote:
Originally Posted by Roman2K
It's called Core Temp Gadget, available in the add-on section of the Core Temp website. It requires Core Temp to be running in the background, as it's where it pulls its data off of. Better looking, pastel colors (cores 1 though 6):Quote:
Originally Posted by Manicdan
- FEFF99
- FECD66
- FF9966
- FF99FD
- 9ACCFF
- CCFE67
Excellent..:up:Quote:
Originally Posted by Roman2K
What was your CPU-NB frequency for this 24hr run ?
The CPU-NB was clocked at 2800 MHz (1.1375V). I can't get it to 3000 because of the behaviour described above :(:Quote:
Originally Posted by felix_w
Quote:
Originally Posted by Roman2K
How high did you go with CPU-NB Voltage ? 2800MHz for (stock i believe) 1.1375V is very good i guess...
At stock it was a little above 1V. Here's what I managed, each time for 1 hour of Prime95 Blend:Quote:
Originally Posted by felix_w
- 2400 (12 x 200): 1V
- 2600 (13 x 200): 1.0625V
- 2800 (14 x 200): 1.1375V
- 3000 (15 x 200): failure, even at 1.3V
- 3000 (12 x 250): 1.2125V*
- 2996 (14 x 214): 1.2V*
* random posting "OC failed" error, even after pushing to 1.3V
Once you find the wall, NB isn't going to want to budge much. It gets kind of picky, and sort of like you noticed more voltage doesn't seem to help much. If you sacrifice some core clock, you can usually get an extra notch out of NB. The same is true for maximum core clock by sacrificing a touch of NB. Most people try to walk the line and split the difference. Both my 1090T and 1100T don't like going above the 2800 notch.
*** BUMP ***
Just because it deserves it, and I needed some info from this thread... :D
Just got my 1100T .... 1105MPM is the batch...hope i take it stable with minimal effort to 4G....though only on M4A79 board...
Be interesting to see what the VID is for that chip.:)Quote:
Originally Posted by felix_w
Auto is 1.4V...Coretemp reports 1.4V also...BIOS reports 1.392V at Auto...now tryin' to set the best i can for 30 min of experimenting on it....
Thats a pitty,chances are it will need slightly more volts for 4ghz.:(Quote:
Originally Posted by felix_w
its not to hard, because one my chip can 4 GHz stable with 1.325V only (air) and second with 1.365V
So far i've tried to see how high i can take my 8GB-8800 Pi Black kit...seems that all that time the problem was the IMC of my previous 940BE....
Running LinX Full Ram for 16.5x210 @ 1.4V...All other Voltages Auto, except RAM=1.9V and Turbo,CPU & PCIE Spread Spectrum Off...4 runs and moving strong...
Everest CPU temp is 41-42C at 100% load (Cores @ 31-32C), Coretemp is 41C with 9deg offset (trying to see if i can calibrate)...
Water Temp Before CPU is 25.3C (acc. to Phobya Sensor) and Ambient Temp is about 22C...
When i finish with LinX, i'll try CPU/CPU-NB clocks with 1.4V and then overnight Prime95 x64 v26.6.1 with what i think to be stable...
I hope to find 24/7 Prime Stable Max clocks till Friday-Saturday...
EDIT : I am having a difficulty getting 4G stable...at 1.45Vset in bios,i'm getting a big Vdrop under stress...1.413V is what the cpu gets while running prime...
System is inside my case and running 4 sticks of ram....these could be reasons for holding it back a little,aren΄t they?
You guys are pretty lucky. None of my Thubans (three to date) have been happy doing 4.0 at anything less than 1.475V. The 1100T that was given to me as a gift is the one that does 1.475. It acts mostly stable even at 4.1-4.2 GHz, but it's clearly not since random crashes are eliminated by decreasing frequency. The 1090T I used before it wasn't ever fully happy at 4.0. It would do 3.8-3.9 at 1.55V with total stability, but it couldn't do 4.0 regardless of voltage without periodically crashing. It "acted" stable-ish up to 4.1 GHz. The 1055T I played with originally seems to do 4004 at 1.55 most of the time, but it also has some issues. Anything less voltage wise and it bombs out fast.
wow that sounds pretty bad,
i got my 1055T stable at like 1.45v for 4ghz (i have the screenshot, never uploaded it to the overclocking sheet since i dont really use it at those speeds)
i wonder if you could be heat limited then?
I don't think that is the case. It's a relatively cool environment with a top performing heatsink and the best thermal paste around. (Tuniq Tower 120 Extreme + Shin Etsu X23-7783D) I'm more inclined to believe my chips just all fall on the poor side of normal, considering the graph. I also think a lot of people consider their system stable when it isn't. Ideally we'd have 48 hours of OCCT. I've seen a fair share of chips fail out after only 25-30 hours. It may not appear unstable at first, but it does cause crashes eventually during normal use which a user might attribute to something else due to the infrequency.
i had a setting thats stable forever on benchmarks
crashed when my friend was playing facebook flash games due to idle voltage being too low, but even that was passing every test i threw at it
some things in life just act weird
Sorry for the delay,i was all day out and stuck on a crappy traffic jam in the evening...right now i'm running 1hr so far at 20x200 @ 1.55V set at bios...all other settings at auto and ram at 800mhz...temp is 48C max....voltage at load is 1.507-1.510 as cpu-z shows...
tomorrow i'll leave it priming with 2x2GB Blades to see if 4 sticks is the issue or i got a banana cpu....
hi!Quote:
Originally Posted by I.nfraR.ed
how did you set the load line calibration on the ch iv formula?
what is the max safe voltage of the NB voltage (not the cpu-nb voltage).
thank you
ps
awesome ram kit :)
Must get Thuban!
Your GTX2 is just fabolous, prime stable @ 1850 6-6-5 1,70V How many sticks do you have?Quote:
Originally Posted by I.nfraR.ed
can I have a picture of your bios subtimmings?
Phenom II x6 1090T @4.05
LinX without error
http://image.ohozaa.com/i/7ea/38bus1800665picture2.png
- CPU Model: AMD Phenom II X6 1100T BE
- CPU Stepping: CCBBE CB 1105MPM
- CPU Frequency: 4050 MHz
- CPU vCore: 1.575V
- CPU Multiplier: 18.0x
- CPU Turbo: Disabled
- CPU NB Speed: 2925 MHz
- HT Ref Speed: 225 MHz
- RAM Speed: DDR2-1200
- RAM Timings: 5-5-5-18-2T
- RAM Configuration: 2 x 2GB
- RAM vDIMM: 1.90V
- Motherboard: ASUS M4A79 Deluxe
- Chipset/Socket: 790FX + SB750, AM2+
- Cooling: Water (D-Tek Fuzion V2)
- Temps: 31C Idle / 48C Load
- Operating System: Windows 7
- 32/64-Bit: 64
- Stable/Suicide/Untested: Stable
http://i256.photobucket.com/albums/h...able8Hr-th.png
Though Vcore is set to 1.575V i measured with DMM to be 1.545V during load...
I have one question though for fellow members....how is it possible to have passed 8+hr of prime blend and when running PCmark 7 system crashes with BSOD error #124 with the same settings ?
Updated
I'd lean on the RAM. Increase the Mem usage in Prime to max out the RAM and see how it does then.Quote:
Originally Posted by felix_w
Thank you charged...:up:Quote:
Originally Posted by charged3800z24
so prime 8hr stable settings is just a first step to stability, right ?
its near impossible for any one test to check full stability, just live life and if it never crashes, its stable enough for you. for me i just cant have it crash in WoW, which it tough since i played at someone else house, where i think the power lines fluctuated the voltage too much, since its perfectly stable at my home. so while it passes how ever many hours of however many tests i threw at it, i got different results at different places.
thanx dan...i just tried about 2-3 weeks with my spare time to geti this thing to stable (?) and you can imagine my face when system crashed while running transcoding test in PCMark 7....
with cpu frequency a nitch down, i can pass, but now i'm really trying to run every benchmark possible for many hours to see if it's an IMC thing or my ram...
i have a second pair of blades , so i'm now testing those...
i had my super stable pc crash due to facebook flash games that never pushed the cpu past 5% usage.
some things will never make sense, uping the Vid by another notch did fix it though
Motherboards tend to overcompensate for high loads. The flip side of course is that your idle state is receiving less voltage than your load state, so eventually your CPU causes a problem that results in a fatal exception. The scenario where you're fine under full load but crash at idle until you up vCore a smidge is a rather common story because of that.
with an asus motherboard i know that LLC has a major part in what actual voltage is that we almost have no clue of.
i actually have it off so that my idle voltage is high, and when load kicks in the voltage droops rather than overcompensates, so i know that in between idle/load it should be more stable as it changes pstates
in the end it was stable for everything at every pstate, except that damn flash game. it was my roommate who noticed it, since hes the one playing those lame things, and i upped the vid and it never happened again.
Even without LLC, that circuit isn't without any form of compensation. All regulated supplies attempt to compensate, just not all do it so aggressively.
Performed extensive sessions with memtest 4.20...
any combo of 4.0GHz and NB over 2600MHz with ram at 1150 or 1200 would cause errors ( test #5 move block) after 20-30 loops...
4.0Ghz & NB 2400MHz with mem 1200 5-5-5-18-30-2T (1.88V) would pass even 50-60 loops...
So i think that the IMC is the thing, not my ram...have 2 sets 1200 ram with Active Cooling, that do fine on other systems or this system @ lower cpu/nb clocks...
Quote:
Originally Posted by konlaos
wich memory is this? what a weird XMP, 3500Mhz?
Elpida Hypers in a 1333Mhz kingston? WTF?
@Barr3l Rid3r
KHX2000C8 (Elpida Hyper MGH-E)
Is that true?Quote:
Originally Posted by QuietIce
Thats a good ball park. My 555 and 955 all started to get bad in the 55-60c range. All my best over clocks are definatley under 50c loaded. There are exceptions, some here have gotten air OC's in the 60s and 4+GHz. Those are very special parts and are not the norm. Out of 5 PII Ive had none would do anything over 3.6GHz stable on air&load. All would run to 80c @ stock speeds just fine.
RussC
Quote:
Originally Posted by almighty15
If you can keep it under 50C, you'll get very good clocks :)
Mine will do 50 run runs of Intel burn test at 4.1Ghz with a load voltage of 1.55v with a CPU temp of 70 degrees C.
If I drop down to 4Ghz stable Max temp is between 55-60 degrees C.
My 1075T has a Thermochill PA 120.3 all to itself so how am I going to improve my cooling?
Particle there are issues I have with this list...
For example a post like Daveburts...(not to pick on him, it was just there)
He has 1.45v set, idles at 1.452, and in second screen 1.464, chances are load is at least 1.476-1.488v in CPU-Z and upwards of 1.49v on the DMM.
I can post 4.1 stable set at 1.43-1.44v, and 4 Ghz stable at "1.39v" and CPUNB at 3 Ghz at 1.33v if we all went that way.
My CPU doesnt even do 4.2 stable AFAIK most of the time I crash around an hour.
I'm not a believer in long stability tests especially at high volts considering my M4A89TD only has a 6+2 (doubled 3+1) phase setup. My mosfets are up in 95-100c range with just 4 Ghz/1.4v.
Typcally anything over 4 hours is overkill as well, all you will have past 4 hours is a CPU failing because of heat (unrealistic unless you run WCG) or a board failure.
I'd gladly run 4 hours, maybe 6-7 if I start it when I go to bed and turn it off or see what went up when I wake up...but I normally will not go for a 4.2 Ghz stable run at "1.51v" (1.54 real) load and not watch it.
I'm Intel burn test stable at 4Ghz with a load voltage of 1.44v and Intel burn test stable at 4.1Ghz with a load Vcore of 1.5v
Max temp at 4Ghz according the CPU socket temp was 57c
Max temp at 4.1Ghz according to the socket temp was 62c
You have a good point on Vcore...my last submission here was with Bios Value and if you look at ss, voltage is 0.04v lower...Quote:
Originally Posted by BeepBeep2
As for stability, my last is also 8hr prime, which finally seemed not to be rock stable....something wrong with my IMC maybe, i don't know, but it could not be revealed even with 8hr prime stress...
There are a lot of factors that come into play...Quote:
Originally Posted by felix_w
Yeap, that's why the 8hr Prime doesn't seem to me to belong to my stability criteria anymore...just an intermediate step...
Its not even that...Quote:
Originally Posted by felix_w
I run 1 1/2 hour OCCT Small for CPU only, 30 pass LinX for IMC and 4 Hour prime 95 for memory. Most of the time LinX will fail for IMC within 15 passes when Prime will take hours...
Then I game extensively like I usually do and within the next week if I dont crash, have programs crash or BSOD at any point that is when I will label it stable.
Prime95 Small FFT's = CPU only stress?
Prime95 Large FFT = ?
Prime95 Blend = Whole system?
... :)Quote:
Originally Posted by almighty15
So in Theory then If I can do say 8 hours small and large fft's then I should be able to do 8hrs blend?Quote:
Originally Posted by wez
Yea, in theory :)Quote:
Originally Posted by almighty15
If I mandated people use calibrated DMMs to measure vCore under load, we'd have virtually no entries where people could be classified as "stable". It would be even less useful than what we've got now, which I believe is a reasonable compromise. Since we don't exist as members of a laboratory, I just use the highest number I'm presented with. When people say "xV BIOS / xV load" or whatever, I pick whichever is higher so that the chart errors as much as possible on the side of worst case scenario. As for heat, if you're going to fail at due to thermals, you'll probably be caught within 8 hours. It's not uncommon for a CPU to fail only after extended durations even way beyond 8 hours. My personal standard is 24 hours with 48 being better, and I've seen failures at 25-26 hours for example. It doesn't take that long for things to heat up and saturate thermal solutions. Maybe your chip is on the fence. If it is, you're not stable regardless of the cause. Your definition of stable, beep, is more of a definition of stable-ish, and that's not good enough for me.
Blend is better than small or large FFTs imo. Who cares if your CPU is stable if the memory system isn't. It's an unusable system either way, you know?
No, the system isn't perfect, but it would be unrealistic to expect members of a forum like this to contribute better information on average. This is an informal setting.
Currently running prime95 on blend at 4.1ghz with a load Vcore of 1.488v
Memory is at 1826Mhz @ 9-11-9-27-1T with 1.65v
NB is at 2739Mhz
HT is at 2191Mhz
Max temp is 59c and it's been going for 30 mins with no problems at all, even with me using the computer :)
On the old BIOS I need a load Vcore of 1.55v to handle 4.1Ghz :eek:
Will find my max CPU overclock then work on tweaking the RAM speed and timings :)
I didnt ask for DMM numbers. I asked for one standard.Quote:
Originally Posted by Particle
That is either:
1. Post what you set and mention you have LLC on or off
2. Post the voltage CPU-Z tells you on load, not the voltage you have on idle or the voltage you set.
People are currently doing all three.
Daveburt's CPU is listed at 1.45v when he idles at 1.464 and to my knowledge of LLC he's up around 1.48 on load.
Particle I'm pretty sure I can pass 8-12 hours blend and fail LinX...I can also make it pass LinX and fail Blend...you tell me why.
Whats the point in failing at 8 to 12 hours because of heat?
On water we have equilibrium, it will even out after about 8-9 hours. ...on air you can get constantly rising temps if it is incapable of handling the heatload. Even by your standards you will never find out what stable really is. Also what you call stable and what I call stable can be different. It's more a matter of opinion. I can run my rig at 4.3 Ghz and game all day and night on it, encode video on it, make a sandwich with it but it will fail Prime95 within 10 minutes.
how reliable is cpuz with voltages? even if they are all off by a small amount, is it the same on all boards?
I'm water cooled and running Prime95 right now and my temps slowly climbed to 59c and that's were they have stayed for the last ~30 mins or so.Quote:
Originally Posted by BeepBeep2
I'm running Blend for an Hour after that I'm calling it a day, I'm not going to waste time running Prime95 for hours when I should be enjoying my computer :)
No idea, I do have voltage read out points on my Crosshair 4 Extreme but I don't have a multi meter to test accuracy.Quote:
Originally Posted by Manicdan
I measured on my M4A79 Bios 3702 and for my 1100T the following:
Bios Set:1.5375Idle DMM:1.513Load DMM:1.523Idle Cpu-Z:1.534Load Cpu-Z:1.493
Other setting may have other δV. Cpu-Z is Version 1.57 x64
My DMM is a V&A VA18B, with fresh batteries.
Measuring point is on the back of the board, choke leg (as shown by CAL930 in this thread)
Quite a difference if you ask me, I'll have to try and get a DMM from the girl friends dad and see how my Extreme compares :)Quote:
Originally Posted by felix_w
ASUS M4A89TD Pro/USB3 - LLC on
BIOS Set
1.40v
Idle -
CPU-Z 1.416v
DMM 1.419v
Load -
CPU-Z 1.428-1.440v
DMM 1.457v
DMM is an Extech MN35, measuring points are capacitor leads on 3rd phase from bottom...
Essentially if I went with the same method Daveburt went I could claim 1.4v when I'm actually close to 1.46 or even 1.44 according to CPU-Z (again, not to pick on him, just an example)
Yes! Prime95 Blend for 1hr at 4.1Ghz with 1830Mhz RAM
Load Vcore of 1.488v
On previous BIOS it was 4.1 with 155v load Vcore with max temp of 70c :eek:
Will aim for 4.2Ghz tomorrow :D
Oh particle btw:
I've had P95 Blend fail at 9 hours (went to sleep) before due to using box cooler and ram heating up from CPU heat ;)
2400 NB and 3600 CPU was obviously not the cause for a rounding error...and sticks do not fail much after 4 hour range, if it fails after 5 its because of heat build up.
There are way too many factors to define stable...
You aren't providing any revelations here when it comes to stress tests not proving stability. If you start over from the start of this thread, you'll see quite quickly that I early on was mandating a minimal degree of stability testing that most people refused to do. You'll also find us all collectively bickering about how to define stable. There is no reasonable method of testing that I can mandate here that actually proves absolute stability. That also isn't the point.Quote:
Originally Posted by BeepBeep2
What I require now is a compromise between what I had originally intended to be the bare minimum proof (24 hours) since an empty chart is wholly useless. What we've got now is a good indicator of "some reasonable degree of stability with some validation via testing having been performed". The entire point of making people test is not to define settings that are known to be 100% rock solid but rather it is to weed out the extremely poor quality of what normally passes for "stable" in a post-your-clocks thread like this, which is that someone says it is with absolutely no formal bar established nor proof required.
Unless your argument is we shouldn't require as good of information as we've got now, you don't really have much of a point to make about what we've done here. The bar has been raised to a minimum level where we have a minimum quality to our results not found elsewhere. Even as it stands, you'll note that half of all people STILL can't be bothered to do even such minimal testing. Mandating perfectly accurate data from users is absolutely and utterly impractical.
Any individual contributor is welcome to provide any superior amount of testing and more accurate temps or voltages they wish. It's also rather insulting to myself and others considering the amount of work we've all put into making this information an order of magnitude more organized, standardized, and useful than what is normally seen in efforts like this. I'm not going to apologize for the excellent work done by members of this board for the sole purpose of benefiting others like yourself.
the simple answer is the honesty code, if someone had a BSOD after posting results, we take it off the sheet and request them to not be on our forum anymore, right? lol
Why so angry? I'd like to make this a stimulating conversation rather than a heated arguement.Quote:
Originally Posted by Particle
I'll happily run your 8 hours at speeds I trust the board wont kill itself at.
I'm not looking for an apology, and I never insulted your hard work. I know how hard it is to gather up this much information and put it into graphs and charts as you have.
I just would have liked something a little more accurate as far as recorded voltages go.
1.45v does not equal 1.488v with LLC on...nor does a set voltage of 1.51v equal a load voltage of 1.45v when its off. People have been posting different numbers all over the place.
I would just like it where you cant get away with saying your 8-hour "AFAIK stable" overclock only needs 1.43v when CPU-Z is reporting 1.47 or a guy's 8-hour "AFAIK stable" run set at 1.49v is only giving 1.43v at load.
I see. The impression I'd gotten from you was that you were saying the data was all worthless, and intentionally or not that is rather insulting considering all the work put into this project. This is especially so considering that your complaint was that we hadn't worked very hard to standardize submission data which is absolutely not true. That has been and continues to be a major focus of this thread, and I believe it to be a large part of why this effort has been so successful. If that's not the case, all the better, but that is why your comments had provoked hostility.
I've always encouraged accurate data. You'll note many people report multiple voltages (BIOS, load, idle, DMM, etc) with their submissions. I always use whichever is highest. I've modified the original post to make what I'm after more clear to new contributors, but there's a strong chance that few will ever read all the instructions so we'll see what happens.
Can't get 4.2Ghz on my 1075T
Seems it's heat that stooping me as I'm at 59c when stress testing at 4.1Ghz
As for the whole different Vcore argument I'm pretty sure the OP asked people to state there LOAD voltages.
Mines 1.452v idle and 1.488v load.
CPU Model: AMD Phenom II X6 1100T
CPU Stepping: CCBBE CB 1105MPM
CPU Frequency: 4004.7 MHz
CPU VID: 1.475/1.520 VCORE
CPU Multiplier: 16x
CPU Turbo: Disabled
CPU NB Speed: 2403.2 MHz
HT Ref Speed: 267 MHz
RAM Speed: DDR2-1066
RAM Timings: 5-6-6-18-2T
RAM Configuration: 8 GB (4 x 2 GB)
RAM VCORE: 1.75/2.16 VTT
Motherboard: GIGABYTE GA790 X UD4P
Chipset/Socket: AM3, 790X + SB750
Cooling: 2 LITER WATERBATH WATER@AMBIENT W/240MM HEATERCORE
Temps: 23C Idle / 65C Load
Operating System: Windows VISTA
32/64-Bit: 64
Stable/Suicide/Untested:STABLE 8HR PRIME BLEND
http://img42.imageshack.us/img42/100...b8hrstable.jpg
Seems we have the same batch...
Did you test w/ 8gb @ 1ghz or higher,if so what was highest NB clock.
I tested, but never run over 4hrs prime. The closest i have to what you said is this one.
It wasn't tested for stability, cause i changed to 4GB Blade, but ran for 5-6 days with no BSODs or any other trouble...maybe i was lucky...
I also have this test run, but as far as i remember, i ended up with giving close to 1.375V to CPU-NB for running over 4 hours....no ss though (changed to blade, for testing )
You're having trouble increasing the NB with 8GB ram ?
Cpu-NB/Vid and Cpu Vid won't stick so can't boot higher than 2.4ghz.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hell Hound
What do you mean by that ?
Settings are not applied,tried all value's and used AOD for verification.
AOD has never worked for me with this processor....try another tool...
I'm talking about booting @ these settings not windows clocking.
K10 Stat shows no change as well.Cpu NB-Vid Bios option is not working.
i never mentioned windows clocking....i΄m talking about what voltages they show...perhaps the settings that u enter cause the bios to auto load previous (working) settings? I have previous (SB600) version of this board (DS4) and i can recall a similar behaviour in such cases...maybe you can report in detail your bios settings, if possible?
Are you saying voltage resets to default.
Bios Defauts, or last known working setting...my M4A79DLX when a multi/voltage is not ok (does not boot at first) reverts to normal value...
It's that 'Boot Guard' or something like that ( i don't demember if ASRock named it that way or ASUS)...or just a normal BIOS function...
Give us an example of failing CPU-NB multi/voltage that does not succeed to be recognised...
(Have you run another bios ? did it do the same ? how about other cpu ?)
Have you tried saving the settings with one stick of ram in the slot. It's weird but I had a board do that to me and all I had to do was take out one ram save then insert back in.Quote:
Originally Posted by Hell Hound
Haven't tried that yet.
Here is lower volts though,I started hardware monitor after prime that's why min is high.Mobo is GA-MA790X-UD4P I forgot to put MA last time sorry.Also bios and hardware monitor shows memory @ 2.14v it jumps to 2.16v under load.:up:
CPU Model: AMD Phenom II X6 1100T
CPU Stepping: CCBBE CB 1105MPM
CPU Frequency: 4004.7 MHz
CPU VID: 1.4625/1.504 VCORE
CPU Multiplier: 16x
CPU Turbo: Disabled
CPU NB Speed: 2403.2 MHz
HT Ref Speed: 267 MHz
RAM Speed: DDR2-1066
RAM Timings: 5-6-6-18-2T
RAM Configuration: 8 GB (4 x 2 GB)
RAM VCORE: 1.75/2.16 VTT
Motherboard: GIGABYTE GA-MA790X-UD4P
Chipset/Socket: AM3, 790X + SB750
Cooling: 2 LITER WATERBATH WATER@AMBIENT W/240MM HEATERCORE
Temps: 23C Idle / 65C Load
Operating System: Windows VISTA
32/64-Bit: 64
Stable/Suicide/Untested:STABLE 8HR PRIME BLEND
http://img850.imageshack.us/img850/1...b8hrstable.jpg
http://img192.imageshack.us/img192/1962/memoryvolts.jpg
Updated
Here is the max that I can get without kill the chip and just using multiplier.
CPU Model: AMD Phenom II X6 1090T BE
CPU Stepping: ----------
CPU Frequency: 4630.82 MHz
CPU vCore: 1.6V
CPU Multiplier: 23x
CPU Turbo: Disabled
CPU NB Speed: 3000 MHz
HT Ref Speed: 2000 MHz
RAM Speed: DDR3-1600
RAM Timings: 8-8-8-20-1T
RAM Configuration: 4 GB (2 x 2 GB)
RAM vDIMM: 1.65V
Motherboard: Gigabyte 890FXA-UD5 Rev. 2.0
Chipset/Socket: AM3, 890FX + SB850
Cooling: Water (EK Supreme HF + MCR320-QP + MCP655-D)
Temps: 35ºC Idle / --C Load
Operating System: Windows 7
32/64-Bit: 64
Stable/Suicide/Untested: Unstable
Link to CPU-Z validation: http://valid.canardpc.com/show_oc.php?id=1628727
http://valid.canardpc.com/cache/banner/1628727.png
I'm gonna start doing my 8 hour prime stress test I'll post my results after Its done.
4 hours & a shutdown. need more testing to get the most stable Clocks I'll be posting in a week or so I guess. Getting my self G.skill sniper 8GB kit @ 1600MHz
:up:Quote:
Originally Posted by saint19
...really curious to see what you can get out of this chip stable...
That's odd, Hell Hound. I'm not experiencing those issues using same board, bios, and cpu.Quote:
Originally Posted by Hell Hound
Huh :shrug: thread filled w/ users with the same problem on all bioses.
http://www.overclock.net/amd-motherb...0x-t-ud4p.html