Printable View
Thanks ol'norton. Some of the Intel documentation is not 100% accurate and information that used to apply to Core 2 no longer applies to Core i7 so not all software monitoring programs are working correctly yet. Not all bioses are working correctly either by the sounds of it.
Just a quick update to RealTemp today so it's a little easier to see the important information.
http://img509.imageshack.us/img509/7177/rt290rc1ko7.png
Thanks to everyone at XS that has helped me with this project. :up:
Thats how I undersatood it. If TDP, Temp and voltage stability are all in -pre specced parameters you get the Turbo +1 multi, but if they're not, you're back to max stock multi (20x for the i920). However it seems all boards come with a way around those checks so you can effectively force the +1 multi permanently via bios option(s).Quote:
Originally Posted by unclewebb
Yep, F3 bios (on Ext anyways) has TDP limit apparently enabled so turbo is active at 1-2 cores loaded on mine anyways and inactive for 3-4 cores loaded, and F4beta bioses have TDP limit apparently disabled hence turbo = +1 multi.Quote:
Originally Posted by [XC]Atomicpineapple
Would be nice if that TDP limit was available for us to turn on/off. I thought some boards at least in reviews had the option to turn that on or off, without having to switch bioses to do so.
man these CPUs are so hot
i was trying to make 4.4GHz CPU tests stable on SS last night and i managed a few runs but a lot of them were lockups
my evap temps go down from -44C to -38C or below when they manage to JUST scrape through
that's -44C after the 3D tests ;)
so in game (vantage) drop of almost 15% at with a CPU at 4.4GHz and 1.42v :shocked::shocked::shocked::shocked:
that is just downright :banana::banana::banana::banana:ing ridiculous beyond ridiculous
what the hell is going on here. Is Intel going back to those old Pentium nuclear plan reactors or something :confused:
With or without HT?Quote:
Originally Posted by dinos22
HT drives up consumption quite a bit.
Btw, why not hook up a wattmeter and see how much they really consume. ;)
Also i think Ci7 is far away from P4, its faster then C2, consume less in idle and only consumes more in full load, but offers 8threads insted of 4.
i had a watt meter hooked upQuote:
Originally Posted by Hornet331
ok before i turned on the system i had 560-630W consumption from phase change, monitor and laptop which were all hooked up on the same plug
on STOCK setup 3DMARK Vantage in second GFX test peaked at 1488Watts .... so that means that the system at stock peaked at around 860W
now i am not sure if the second card was drawing full power as it was faulty (could not start system from second card when tested as single) but the setup was as follows
core i7 920 stock
3GB RAM kit
Xfire 4870X2
corsair HX1000 PSU
one drive
imho the lionshare of the consumption go to the 2 HD4870X2, one X2 is ~ 310W (at socket with a PSU in the 1kW region) at load.
i was told at stock settings they are 220W
i will actually do some testing if i eventually get the replacement card with a dual setup power consumption and then single card and take out the difference as a representation of Wattage draw from one card
would that be right do you think
Released today (not from JZelectronic :ROTF:):
EX58-Extreme-BIOS F4j
EX58-UD5-BIOS F4k
LINK
Any word on which will be the official F4??Quote:
Originally Posted by stasio
Dudes, what is postcode 69 on GA-EX58-UD5?
Turn on L2 cache
Finally I did manage to get over that postcode 69 swapping memory to white slots.
Weird. I did update bios to F4k right away.
interesting
my rig doesnt like white slots
I did have excact same problem with Intel Smackover, weird issues.
sure that would work, i did the same with the X2 review from techreport. Thats where i have my ~300W numbers from. :DQuote:
Originally Posted by dinos22
@ white slots
Well guys, read the manual, its on page 17, you MUST populate the white slots (DDR3_1, DDR3_3, DDR3_5) at first if you want to run triple channel. Else the memory controller switches to dual channel mode and you lose one stick.
It is no wired issue, its designed that way. ;)
I'm having problem when running prime95. It fails within 1 minute. Here are my settings:
20x200 bios f4e gigabyte X58 extreme
turbo on
HT off.
eist, c1 also off.
qpi 36x
uncore 16X
ram auto.
loadline on
1.4vcore.
qpi/vtt 1.29
cpu pll 1.84
qpi pll 1.18
ioh core 1.120
ich 1/0 1.58
ich core 1.140
memory is Gskill 7-7-7-18 1600MHz 1.9V memory(it's on auto)(No, I am not running it at 1.9v)
I've even upped the Vcore to 1.48 and still freezing.
any ideas?
Run the rams at 6x multi to elimate them as source of failure.
Im sure they can run 1200mhz with 1.6V
I'll do that when I get home tonight. Thanks!!Quote:
Originally Posted by Hornet331
The funny thing is that I was online playing Warhammer for a couple of hours the other evening with no issues running at 4.2.
I have new memory on it's way 8-8-8-24 1.65 OCZ gold 1600Mhz. i won't get it until Tuesday though. :(
What is the highest qpi/vtt that is safe?
I can't run 205 BCLK unless I hit like 1.55v
I haven't been able to get anything higer than 207. Maybe I got a crappy board!!
So what is good QPI voltage & vDIMM relation? That 0,5V difference should not be exceeded, right?
I´m now doing 180x21 and memory is 1440MHz CL 7-7-7-17 1.8V and is QPI 1.31V
Compared to other post, I'm needing really high vcore settings for stability on i7 940
my bios:
CPU: HT & turbo off
loadline enable
uncore 16x
QPI 36x
QPI/VTT 1,28
182x22 prime95 12h stable at vcore 1,4, fails intelburntest within 5 sec
200x20 prime95 12h at vcore 1,4, intelburntest with maximum stress needs 1,425
What other settings is everybody using? Any other volt settings I can up in order to lower vcore?
I Think that this "6" is a "b"...Quote:
Originally Posted by BulldogPO
so it's a "b9" error.
Not mentioned on manual... the main give me this error the first time i started it with 1x 2 DDR3 1333 G.Skill module.
To ensure that the main starts I moved the ram from blue slot to white slot... doing so, even with 3x2 GB main do a quite nice boot.
BTW...
on my Windows Vista 64 there isn't a way to open Gigabyte Easy Tune 6 and Gigabyte Dynamic Energy Saver...
the first gives me an error in communication with socket :confused:
the second gives me an error of compatibilities with my bios (F3)
Why??
I need also relatively high 1.41875 VCore to achieve 4GHz with my 940 on EX58-Extreme.Quote:
Originally Posted by fly_ebos
But as my Chip is on water this is no issue so far.