Printable View
Rumor has it that if I go to 1.6V VCore, I might be able to do 3.4GHz stable on my DS3/Retail E6600.
I've got an Ultra-120 that keeps things nice and cool @ 3.2 GHz (1.45V) and pretty cool at 3.3GHz (1.5V). Ususally no higher than 36C-38C (using SpeedFan)
If I try 1.6V, am I going to smoke my proc?
I know I'm not an expert but I would never go more then .2V above your default. I'm hesitent to go more then .1V myself but I require very stable operation.
I believe that as processes shrink they get more sensitive. hence we should be expressing it as a percentage.
I wouldn't go 15% over default on anything other then good watercooling/phase.
i am actualy doing 1.59375v for 3.4GHz primestable E6400, i dont mind burning it so i have reason to get another one, such as week 25 E6400
well actual vcore is like 1.57 1.58v , and 1.55 1.56v during full load
im on bigtyphoon btw
well if you have good coolin you should be fine, you just have to check your temps and if they seem rather high 55c+ I would back down as thats prety hot but the cpu can take it, I just wouldnt want temps that high
OK, I guess I'll try to go for it at lunch today.
Cooling is basically the key, right? To a point? As long as it never goes over 50C at load, I should be fine I hope. Shoot I doubt I'll even be able to POST @ 378x9 @ 1.6V anyway. Shoulda bought 975X.
Cooling does not protect your CPU against electron migration and the wearing out of the tiny paths in the chip.
Youre reducing the lifespan of your chip exponentionally with more volts, but I guess it will last you a while anyway even with 1.6v. The question is are the extra 200Mhz worth the headache?
i would say set 1.6v in the bios and then measure it at the mosfet or coil to see if that is accurrate...a lot of times the control of the vcore is less than set in the bios.
i've been running an old athlonxp for 3 years now @ 1.75v
default was 1.5v
it's been working fine
what, that's an extra 16% of voltage for 3 years?
yeah mine is like 48c ish during orthos after about 20 min
also AMD chips uses more voltage from what i have seen, with watercooling, a lot of people r doing 1.95v somewhere close to 2v
intel cpu are just different
and yes, i set 1.593675v in BIOS, actual is like 1.57v 1.58v according to speedfan
1.6v on 65nm 24/7? Maybe on phase or high end water. But definately not air. I wouldn't even go past 1.4v on air for 24/7 if you want longetivity.
Actual is what is actually measured by a voltmeter. Speedfan doesn't report actual voltage, it's just a software monitoring program, that's all. Everest/cpuz all the same. (Not real volts and in no way accurate)Quote:
Originally Posted by theteamaqua
i wouldnt go above 1.6v if u want hte cpu to last long you need to have better cooling above 1.5 definitely not stock at least i think anyways
So let's say cpu lifespan is 25 years, you will reduce it by 10, so what? :)
You can't even imagine what volts some people run here :)
I am at 1.425V ATM since I am fsb limited
Just remember that the official Intel datasheet on Core 2 states that anything above 1.55 vCore will shorten the lifespan of your chip. By how much? Well that's anyone's guess.
Well I did it!
378x9 (3.4GHz) @ 1.6VCore... and it's STABLE! Real stable!
I closed up all of the intake vents on the case and got things REAL hot inside while running Prime95. I then opened up the vents and let it sit and Prime for my whole lunch hour. The highest the CPU got was 52C. It idles around 34C. I also ran 3DMark05 which will immediately bomb out during the CPU tests if it's not stable. If it passes that test it will pass 24 hrs. of Prime - proved it about 5 times last week.
I'm happy. :)
I found 3D06 cpu test to be a bit more bite then 3D05 ;)Quote:
Originally Posted by Brahmzy
i got my E6600 at 3.4ghz at 1.49v 24/7 stable as a rock. i doubt u need 1.6v
I have had prime fail over 2 hours. I stick to at least 10 hours to be "stable"Quote:
Originally Posted by Brahmzy
? maybe on 180nm or even 130nm, but not on 90 nm or 65nm. 2v would smoke an x2.Quote:
Originally Posted by theteamaqua
Electron migration becomes an exponentially larger problem as you increase volts. 1.6 volts probably isn't too safe on air. IMHO, it probably won't last more than 1.5, maybe 2 years, but it's your choice to risk it.
I suggest you try S&M cpu stress test @ 100% load...
even in the short run
the cpu will surely reach temps you haven't seen before with prime and/or 3DMarks..
and while you're at it... try the memory test as well
up untill now its the most sensitive cpu/memory error-diagnostic tool i've ever used....
(just remeber to disable the thermal monitoring within the software
- if your mobo is supported-
as its totally gay and stops the test even with a 10C Td)
also don't forget to check the chipset temps too
"spare-ribs on the 975x nB" is a well-known o/cers-treat here in Greece....
You've definitely got a better chip than I do then. Can you please post your BIOS settings?Quote:
Originally Posted by Pandamonia
I just tried 1.6V first - I may be able to get away with less voltage - I'll try tonight. I know I need more than 1.5V though - already tried that a week ago-didn't boot to Windows. Just never wanted to go any higher til now. :)
I run it through it all night tonight - just didn't have time during my lunch hour.Quote:
Originally Posted by Rare1
I'll run memtest tonight as well.
i wouldnt go past 1.55v
I'm worried about these high voltages you guys are putting these chips through.
Some of the northwoods started to very slowly lose their OC if you even went .025v higher than default. (1.575->1.6v from 1.55v); and you guys are putting 1.6v through .65nm chips...@@
Will be a matter of time before I start seeing posts like "the chip isn't stable anymore, it was stable for a few weeks...."
I HOPE I don't see posts like that...but you guys are putting more voltage through them than Intel's *Absolute* maximum....(which is 1.55v, and that is still much higher than the max operational voltage...).
So, let's assume you take heat out of the equation (Phase, LN, witchcraft, whatever).
The actual voltage causes degradation and damage to the chip? I mean, makes sense and all, I'm just interested in what exactly it does.
Quote:
Originally Posted by xpsentity
basicaly what he means is think of a river wearing away at it's banks as the flow increases so does erosion.....electricity works in a similar fashion......
The best way to tell if your cpu is lossing "it" is to do a quick benchtest with CS:S stress test or HL2:LC stress test before and after the OC. I've notice that even though you can OC the C2D the performance can be worst if you don't have the right vcore set. Unlike P4's where you simply would freeze or blue screen when trying to benchmark.
1.6v on air. If u don't mind about your cpu, go for it... :p:
some body will find the voltage needed to kill a conroe i just hope it isn't me.
hmmm in the past got issues under prime although no trouble under 3 dmark 05.Quote:
Originally Posted by Brahmzy
IMO 3dmark isn't enough to test stability
Has anyone actually burnt out a CPU from overvolting it for an extended period of time? Would it actually have any risk of burning out in 2-3 years at 1.5 volts?
I have.
I almost killed a 3.4 ghz Northwood (it used to do 3.8 stable, at the end it wouldn't even make it into the *BIOS* at 3.7!, last stable speed was 3.6) by giving it 1.7v for awhile, and a 2nd degraded to the point where I simply sold it for a huge discount, and advertised as lost O/C from excessive vcore (3.7 required a huge increase in vcore, where again it was initially stable at 3.8; that chip was run at 1.675v), and even my 3.4EE i'm using has lost a few mhz, but nowhere near the others.
(i've lost about 75 mhz on it by running it at 1.575-1.6v --and STOCK is 1.55!).
That should tell you something.
There have been people who have done worse than me--actually KILLED Processors (stock wasn't even stable anymore) from voltage.
I don't know if this has happened with Prescotts (never had one).