Printable View
Hey guys,
In my quest for 3.6ghz I've finally reached it but, with 1.57 volts. I'd like to keep it stable but I don't know how much longer it'll last on 1.6. I have a tuniq tower btw. Also it seems I have one of the newer suckier batches. So 1.6v for 3.6 or 1.5ish for 3.4ghz?
I wouldn't use 1.6V
No way.
Anything over the factory value wouldn´t be considered safe. But I say anything over 1.45V aint safe and over 1.5V it starts to be damaging over time or worse.
http://www.xtremesystems.org/forums/...d.php?t=133650
scroll down to post 8.
it looks like most of us are a whole lot more scared with the cpu than the motherboard itself. Look at mch. 1.313 / 1.375??? most of us run 1.4 or 1.55.
vtt of 1.26 / 1.32?? this is also known as vfsb. considering stock 1.2v, even +0.1v is pretty much hitting absolute limit
ich... the only other option besides stock in the asus p5b is 1.215, which is already past max, although ich seems to have an inordinate abs max.
take of that what you want. i guess a lot of people figure cpu's to be more expensive than motherboards, which in your case is true I suppose.
Most people would say, if it can be kept cool running, keep it 1.6 or lower.
buy another proc and sell that one on e-bay
________
Jaguar Mark X History
Guess not eh? My brother bricked his C2D with a 1.65V..
Depends on temp. If TAT stays below 80C during high load and thermal monitor is not active then you should be fine. Dont forget to cool your mb/ram/chipset
Can you elaborate?Quote:
Originally Posted by Chrono Trigger
i wouldnt use 1.6 unless your on a very good water loop or other type of non normal cooling.
and even then over time it will damage the cpu.
if you need 1.6 to get to 3.6, then you got a bunk clocker.
its not a bad cpu, as it does what you paid for its just a bad clocker.
i too would sell it and get another one.
huh? i don think i even have the option of lowering my Vmch to 1.375... hmm.Quote:
Originally Posted by ziddey
i have it set at 1.55 and if i remember correctly that was right in the middle of my options...
I keep my vmch at 1.25V :D
http://simon.webideal.ca/Temp/XBX2/b11.JPGQuote:
Originally Posted by Shintai
on the XBX2, there are options from 1.50 to 1.70 for the MCH/ICH
(not possible to go to 1.375 & definitely not 1.25)
----
http://simon.webideal.ca/Temp/XBX2/b10.JPG
on the XBX2, there are options from 1.20 to 1.50 for the FSB
*pictures stolen from Supertimor from this thread
http://www.xtremesystems.org/forums/...d.php?t=124131
(page1)
I don't consider 1.6 dangerous... I'd happily use that on water. Did with my ol' 165 and it is still chugging away at that voltage...
P5B Deluxe is P965 based (90nm) and runs at a lower voltage than the 975X (130nm).Quote:
Originally Posted by argylesocks
Please, post more details about your rig (mobo, cpu, ram, cooling type, cpu week if possible, etc) and let us know your temps alongside the program or method you have used to measure the temps with such voltage.
Quote:
Originally Posted by W4ffl35
Well, it's funny how I'm once again proven right.
I was horribly flamed by Wizilla (?) sorry forgot exact name and I don't visit forums as much as I used to, and a couple of other people, when saying that high voltages may be damaging to a C2D just like they were to northwoods, and those flamers said that "Intel had fixed that problem", when I _repeatedly_ posted concerns about that. Those above people kept telling the users to just get good cooling and pump the voltage. I guess people here dont care about ANYTHING when it's not their own money at stake. Now, months after being flamed, suddenly a lot more people are starting to believe and support what I have mentioned all along. The sad thing is, those posters have helped people with many other problems and have been an asset to these forums, but they treated me like I was a complete beginner when it comes to overclocking (I'm age 35; been overclocking since the 166MMX days). And now that some people have seen degradation in some C2D's, the flaming has all but stopped. I would go so far as to suggest an apology was in order, but whatever. And for the record, I've seen some degradation on my C2D. Its about .03v or so, but it has happened. (Core 0 is the affected core for first failures). Next time I post about "Conroe gradual death syndrome", please don't flame me. We don't need people's chips dying JUST because NOT EVERYONE suffers from the problem. That's how teenagers think: "if it doesn't happen to me, it wont happen to anyone". And it costs people *Money*. Not your money, of course...
Fanboys are dangerous.Quote:
Originally Posted by Falkentyne
In fact an Intel engineer once memorably told in an article: "Hell, run 'em as fast as you like. When it blows up we'll be happy to sell you a new one."
But they won't prevent the CPU failing -- you cannae change the laws of physics Jim, as a famous engineer once said.
Well, electromigration and the hot electrons phenomena will teach them otherwise.
e6600 / P5B-DLX / 2gb (2x1gb) Ballistix PC2 8000/ Air cooled with Tuniq Tower and AS5. I'd rather not have to take my computer apart to find the week. Is there another method to find this out? I've dropped my volts back and using ASUS's PC Probe it says I'm idling at 30c I've yet to get it stable enough to test in orthos to find load temps though.Quote:
Originally Posted by psy4fun
As much as I'd like to sell this cpu I don't have the little black plastic piece to protect the chip which could cause problems with shipping and such. That and I think I could only get 250 or so for it (low on funds). Thanks for all the help guys. I'll update the rest of the volts soon.
There's a label in the box.Quote:
Originally Posted by W4ffl35
Do you remember the temps when running on 1.6 vCore? Also, I really suggest you to use CoreTemp for temp measurements:Quote:
Originally Posted by W4ffl35
http://www.xtremesystems.org/forums/...d.php?t=103638
Why not go to a computer store and ask one for free? :)Quote:
Originally Posted by W4ffl35
Haha think they'd have one? I threw the box away btw >_>. The reason I'm not using coretemp is it was causing my computer to restart when I'd run it.
been feeding my e6600 1.7v (biossetting 1.7v) for about 5 months now on water with loadtemps around 60c dont know how big vdroop so could be 1.65-1.7v. if it lasts 6 more months ill be happy to upgrade to quad. kind of depends if you can afford to replace a dead cpu... if that e6600 is suposed to last for a long time 1.6v seems a bit high otherwise go for it.
my 2c
There is a difference of 60C on a non-overclocked CPU and 60C on a heavily overclocked CPU. This is so even when the temperatures are not extensively high. Electronic effects must be also taken into account. Take into account transitory and electrostatic migration levels on the 60C non-overclocked CPU and on a 60C heavily overclocked CPU and you will notice a marked difference. This is one of the reasons why so many overclockers wish to stay lower than the Processor Stock Thermal SPec rating and even when this is done, the effects are lowered, not isolated or held in complete abeyance. This is a reason why 24/7 running of highly volted and overclocked systems can show instability after many days of use, even when tested stringently with Orthos Prime and found valid.
There is a condition called "Threshold Voltage" which is the amount of power necessary to turn on and switch the transistors gates.
There is a formula for the switching power:
Power ~ ½ CV ² Af
This formula states that dissipated power is linear with the effective capacitance, activity and frequency. Power increases quadratically with the CPU's core voltage. Thus when you overclock you are increasing the necessary voltage by a multiple and the voltage effects are not linear but multiplicative, quadratic/exponential so one cannot look at 1.45v and 1.6v and only see a .15 differential in voltage. While this is the case, the view does not take into account the power requirements of such an increase and the effects of this increase on data transmission.
There is more to overclocking than voltage and heat dissipation of the CPU. If the data is being invalidated due to transitory discharge and must STALL | --> flush--> re-access and validate data more frequently then the overclock is marginalized and the CPU is maltreated.
1.6 vcore is not good.
doesnt that kind of depend on how long you want it to live ? benching at 1.8v++ seems to score kind of good .... if you want it to live for a long time then i agree but for a few months or a year untill next uograde then why not ?? if this was xtremesafesystems.org well that would be another story :stick: :)Quote:
Originally Posted by safan80
Well, as close as 3.6 is, I'd rather not fry a 300$ chip for 200mhz. I'm not made of cash (High School Student) So this needs to last 2 year+. But I am at 9x380 with 1.5v 27idle / and was hitting 50 before orthos had a failure.
I usually stick to 1.55v on air and 1.65v on water...
1.57v on air is fine, but 1.66-1.67v on water is NOT fine.
The further away you stay from 1.65 the better, 1.57 on good air is a decent ammount, but safe. A good chip will not even need 1.6+ on water.
2 years then i wouldnt run 1.6v more like 1.45-1.5 but even then no one can promise it will last that long. even if you dont fry it it may well perform worse later on resulting in a lower oc at the sam vcore.Quote:
Originally Posted by W4ffl35
24/7
i use 1.55v on top class air(geminii or infinity)
I think I, and a few others, were just trying to point out that:
- just because you remove the heat from the CPU at a rate greater than or equal to it's generation and your temps are under control and below what you might consider an acceptable temperature,
- does not mean that electromigration and degradation are not occuring.
The power (current) density itself, if increased beyond specifications by over-voltage, can cause material degradation (movement of atoms and ions).
More efficient removal of heat does not directly equate to "no" damage.
this was brought in some threads about a month ago...Intel tells you in the spec if you us eover 1.55v the chip will not be warranted to perform for an extended period of time and if you lower back into spec it may not run normally or as expected
I really like 3500 but I am worried about 1.52v on WCing....
I keep debating on whenther i should drop back to 3455
Yes but electromigration doesn't simply occur in days or months... it takes longer.Quote:
Originally Posted by dekruyter
Also, removing heat helps to prevent degradation of the cpu, no doubt.
the slow death/degradation of C2D chips may very well occur but reports are very sporadic..and in general initial stability is no always well documented, which I feel is very important on this issue...easy t osay I a mstable at X speed with very minimal testing then in couple of months have an issue abd say the chip is failingQuote:
Originally Posted by CedricFP
Northwood deaths were very clear and tons of reports
I run my E6600 at 3.6ghz with 1.53 Vcore :nono: ? on water load never over 50C.. I purchased another conroe, it was one of the newer batches and it did not overclock well so I am happy with what I have now
I'm afraid to push my E6300 past 1.45V. It does about 3.1 orthos stable at stock voltage, then requires great increases in voltage for anything very much higher. It can boot at 3.5 or even 3.6, but won't last half a second of orthos even at 1.55 (which I ran for a few minutes, but would never consider for much longer than benching). Right now I'm trying to see the minimum voltage with which it will run stable at 3.15, and I will knock that back up one notch to ensure stability. No tribble at all with idle/load temps with my Scythe Mine (the IHS on my proccy was very flat, unlike many horror stories about some of the C2Ds, and the Mine was very flat and mirror-shiny).
What would you guys recommend as a safe maximum (not, as people like to say, "absolute max"; rather something that'll let this sucker last 2+ years) for 24/7 voltage?
I'd say 1.45v-1.55v on aftermarket air cooling. I won't go above 1.55v on air for 24/7 myself. I can bench up to 3.9 on 1.6v and I only do it for a brief time.
doesnt really matter .. even 1.45v during full load = 1.5+v set in bios can degrade ur CPU over months ... say 3 to 6 months ...
many people have report that their CPU was stable orthos 24hrs when they bought it , but 4,5 months later it isnt.... after 1.45+v 24/7 ...
it depends on ur cooling as well .. keep the temp below 50C or near 50C helps it degrade slower .. i guess
to get E6600 3.6GHz orthos stable ... it needs at least around 1.45v during full load with decent aircooling (or 1.5+v set in bios for most boards) for MOST of the E6600's (check oveclocking database) (yes there r chips can do that for <1.4v but rare)
and yes water do allow a bit higher vcore compare to air such that the 2 degrades the same in the same period
so i dunno ... if u upgrade often say 3 months cycle .. go for 1.6v as it prolly wont matter after 3 months .. might degrade a bit
i had an E6400 (i have E6600 now) i used to run it 3.4GHz @ 1.59v set in bios ... 1.56v idle , 1.54v full load ... it degrade a bit .. the same 1.59v set in bios wont get it over 415fsb or 3.32GHz .. right now its stable @ 3.28GHz 410fsb. it degrade about 120Mhz over about 6 months @ 1.59v set in bios. lol 15fsb, but that CPU had 425fsb wall anyway..
Edit: i had E6400 + DS3 + Bigtyphoon with 120CFM fan ... about the same as tower 120 .. temps were 65C load i think
thats jsut my experience ... i did changed bios and stuff though ... for a couple months i did ran it on 975XBX with 1.59v set in bios , too. then i changed back to DS3
chances r if u set 1.6v in bios ur getting 1.57v idle , 1.55v load .... and from my experience.. it WILL degrade ,
but ummm ... well as long as u keep ur temps below 70C @ load i think ur good ... i think its safe to say that any vcore above default WILL degrade ur CPU, the difference is how long.
EDIT:
as for CPU jsut completely dead like Northwood .. i really dont think its gonna hapnend to anyone, again it will degrade.. but not dead
whats your water cooling setup and ambients...I got 53C at full load via coretemp, lower on TAT, slightly higher on SG..during 26 hrs of blend prime95(ambients were 23/24C..cool for me..in the summer my ambients will be 26C..so temps will be higher)Quote:
Originally Posted by sreedx2
First nobody knows if the issues are mobo related..in all cases we are pushing the mobo fsb 40%-50% or much higher over stock with increased NB voltagesQuote:
Originally Posted by theteamaqua
Second, I still have no seen the reports where people were 24 hr P95 stable and saw degradation....dont forget anything you install can and may affect stability...
But with that said Intel's papers are clear 1.55v is max vcore and will lead to damage over time if used, not sure how long and if and when you return to spec(?? again not sure if there refer to stock voltage or some lower increased value) stock speeds maybe not be stable)
I do believe there will be a slow death to all processors even at stock(esp if you see some of the temps on the stock coolers) but when is the question...
does my setup with watercooling get 3mo, 6mo, 1yr..etc who knows...my setup is on 18hrs/a day on weekend, 12hrs on weekdays...max
Run the speed you want at the vcore you feel is safe for how long you want the processor....I think I good cooling staying under 1.55v will shorten life..
safe 1.45v(about 10%) should give you years...I used to believe 15%(maybe 20%) or less although some feel the smaller die size means this rule may no longer hold true
Intel papers..pdf file
http://developer.intel.com/design/pr...hts/313278.htm
Intel Core 2 Duo Desktop Processor E6000 Sequence – Datasheet
http://developer.intel.com/design/pr...hts/313278.htm
2.6.1 Absolute Maximum and Minimum Ratings
Table 4 specifies absolute maximum and minimum ratings only and lie outside the functional limits of the processor. Within functional operation limits, functionality and long-term reliability can be expected.
At conditions outside functional operation condition limits, but within absolute maximum and minimum ratings, neither functionality nor long-term reliability can be expected. If a device is returned to conditions within functional operation limits after having been subjected to conditions outside these limits, but within the absolute maximum and minimum ratings, the device may be functional, but with its lifetime degraded depending on exposure to conditions exceeding the functional operation condition limits.
At conditions exceeding absolute maximum and minimum ratings, neither functionality nor long-term reliability can be expected. Moreover, if a device is subjected to these conditions for any length of time then, when returned to conditions within the functional operating condition limits, it will either not function, or its reliability will be severely degraded.
Although the processor contains protective circuitry to resist damage from static electric discharge, precautions should always be taken to avoid high static voltages or electric fields.
Table 4. Absolute Maximum and Minimum Ratings
VCC (Core voltage with respect to VSS) –0.3V / 1.55V (Min/Max)
VTT (FSB termination voltage with respect to VSS) –0.3V / 1.55V (Min/Max)
Notes:
For functional operation, all processor electrical, signal quality, mechanical and thermal specifications must be satisfied.
Excessive overshoot or undershoot on any signal will likely result in permanent damage to the processor.
2.6.2 DC Voltage and Current Specification
Table 5. Voltage and Current Specifications
VID (Range of VID) 0.8500V / - / 1.5V (Min/Typ/Max)
VCC (Supply Voltage) - / - / 1.5V (Min/Typ/Max)
VTT (FSB termination voltage) 1.14V / 1.20V / 1.26V (Min/Typ/Max)
Notes:
Adherence to the voltage specifications for the processor are required to ensure reliable processor operation.
Each processor is programmed with a maximum valid voltage identification value (VID), which is set at manufacturing and can not be altered. Individual maximum VID values are calibrated during manufacturing such that two processors at the same frequency may have different settings within the VID range.
Intel 965 Express Chipset Family - Datasheet
http://www.intel.com/design/chipsets...hts/313053.htm
11.1 Absolute Minimum and Maximum Ratings
Table 10-1. Absolute Minimum and Maximum Ratings
VCC (1.5 V Core voltage with respect to VSS) –0.3V / 1.375V (Min/Max)
VTT (System Bus Input Voltage with respect to VSS) –0.3V / 1.32V (Min/Max)
11.3.1 I/O Buffer Supply Voltage
Table 11.4 I/O Buffer Supply Voltage
VCC (MCH Core Supply Voltage) 1.188V / 1.25V / 1.313V (Min/Typ/Max)
VTT (System Bus Input Supply Voltage) 1.14V / 1.20V / 1.26V (Min/Typ/Max)
Intel 975X Express Chipset MCH - Datasheet
http://developer.intel.com/design/ch...hts/310158.htm
10.1 Absolute Minimum and Maximum Ratings
Table 10-1. Absolute Minimum and Maximum Ratings
VCC (1.5 V Core voltage with respect to VSS) –0.3V / 1.65V (Min/Max)
VTT (System Bus Input Voltage with respect to VSS) –0.3V / 1.65V (Min/Max)
10.4 DC Characteristics
Table 10-5. DC Characteristics
VCC (MCH Core Supply Voltage) 1.425V / 1.50V / 1.575V (Min/Typ/Max)
VTT (System Bus Input Supply Voltage) 1.14V / 1.20V / 1.26V (Min/Typ/Max)
the notes for absolute minimum and maximum ratings on top of this post, holds true for chipset voltages also!
I find the fact Intel does not list a typical vcore on the C2D as interesting and the max VTT as being 1.26...hmm..will need to see if I can lower this value tooQuote:
Originally Posted by nealh
Well- my Xeon 3060 'was' a good clocker. But, as someone else mentioned - I did use slightly higher voltages on my Strike Extreme Motherboard. Up until yesterday, my 3060 would run fine with 1.45 volts at 3400MHz. Now, I can't move to anything above default. Mhz
My motherboard votlages were:
1.2 HT @ 1.3
NB @ 1.4
SB @ 1.55
VTT @ 1.4
I can still raise those and get to the Windows Vista 64-bit desktop, but i move the front side bus up any, I either get lock-up or BSoD before desktop.
I like that datasheet a whole lot. And it really makes me wonder. Most of us are running around with vmch > 1.4v on p965. In fact, on my p5b, when I set to stock 1.25v, if I measure vmch with dmm, I measure 1.400. Hmm........
Well, i'm not sure now if my problem is the CPU or the baord. So, i'm going to starta new thread to avoid jacking this one.
Very informative.
Quote:
Originally Posted by nealh
no its not mobo related .. i have DS3 , EVGA 680i , 975XBX ... and believe me 1.59v set in bios on any board wont get it over 415fsb bootable .. where it used to be 425fsb bootable 6 months ago when i bought it .. again its very stable @ 410fsb .. even the EVGA 680i i jsut bought last month ...
as for anything installed ... welll i only have 1 8800GTS right now , and i had 7800GTX installed (and yes during the time when i switched from 7800GTX to 8800GTS i saw no lose in overclockng) .. a network calble, mouse , keyboard , WD2500JS HDD ... thats all i have plugged into the comp same as 6 months ago .. again if a CPU cant boot @ certain speed due to fsb wall ... not much u can do about it ...
Change to the change.
The problem was neither my CPU nor the motherboard. But bad RAM.
To make a long story short: I wasn't taking everything into consideration.
Those people who see their C2D degrading please report in the thread (there was somewhere in Intel section). However, you would need another high end setup to actually verify this since it might be any other component failing.
My 6800 has been runing fine @ 1.5625 going on 6 months now.
Mel
My CPU E6600 need 1,42 to get 3600Mhz stable. It's watercooled good or bad?
yep 1.5vcore is as far as i would go with the tuniq. :)...but i'm in rather a hot climate at times.
i'm now at 3.4ghz at 1.44v....my chippie just isnt 100% rock solid stable at 3.6 :( maybe with better cooling....
0402 bios i only need 1.32v for 3.4...
in winter i'd happily run 1.5+v :)
Bad, very bad... :nono:
:idea:
Follow my recommendation quickly: sell it to me (:banana:) and buy a new one to you (:stick:)!
Quote:
Originally Posted by GNU
1.6V for 8 months and counting on air here. Not a single problem.
Very funny :rolleyes:Quote:
Originally Posted by psy4fun
I would say that since Intel's engineering folks consider 1.55v as a drop-dead maximum that 1.6v would be considered unsafe. :p:
When Intel says, “1.55Vcore max”, they mean that on average, 1.55V is all we can say with XZ% probability. What XZ% may be, it’s anybody guess, but it will be a very high figure. Like human capability, when we are nearing the extreme end of variation, the result is anybody’s guess. So, to play safe, less than 1.55V and it’ll last 10 years, say, and over 1.55V, “we jest dounno, boy!”. What’s there to stretch the imaginations of the minds any further… unless you are into gambling, like which way will the roach turns, 3-to-1, right, or 6-to-13, left [cos’ the breadcrumbs are on the left]. All the submissions after the 1.55Vcore “revelation” are opinions about gambling and if so, who’s putting up the money [to buy another CPU in this instance].
Absolute Truth comes from the brain whereas relative truths come from the 3 human minds and to reach the absoluteness of things, we need to have the specific consciousness switched on and thereafter, we’ll have that particular awareness [of the subject under consideration] forever, whether we’ll ever access it or not. The awareness of the 3 human minds relate to our 5 main senses whereas the awareness of the brain, a reflection of the whole cosmos [honestly mate] and is unlimited, relate to 2 additional senses, namely the 6th & 7th sense and the 5-senses cannot lie to/cheat the 6+7th senses [because Truth is what It is]. Our 5 main unenlightened senses have only one role and that is to cheat ourselves first before cheating others.
Everyone innately knows/senses/are aware, that if you pump in more Vcore, you’ll going to bugger that CPU. As to which voltage, it’s gambling for nobody can say with certainty, what voltage it will be for your CPU even though the fanboys, another name for pimps [pimping their “fame”, vanity, envy or even a secret/NDA agent for his masters] with little brains but full of the relativities of the minds, are blindly leading the pack into CPU oblivion. OK if your CPU was “sponsored” or you have tons of dosh cos’ your butt is always “switched-on”. Afterall, there’s nothing like satisfaction/hobby/”meaning for existing until I get to screw the girlfriend-gayfriend”/etc, that you’ve done Intel out of a few hundred bucks not forgetting that it costs Intel less than the cost of a E4300 to make a X6800. Because we have no means to make a CPU for the cost of a E4300 or even the dollar for a loaf of bread, just put the bloody thing to good use and forget the Big Organ syndrome. My E6600 can do 3.6@1.575V but why aren’t my :banana::banana::banana::banana:o recodes going any faster than when it was at 3.2GHZ? Because they all have varying lengths … in their content which overwhelms the differentials within a CPU range. Overclocking is not maximising your investment. That’s only what the fear & greed within the minds are telling us otherwise known as the “selling of one’s butt”. Over indulgence is called an addiction and addiction is the ability to cheat one self. Whether we are conscious of it or not.
from ancedotal reports here at XS..1.65v is going to screw the cpu..seems many except phase users who pump in 1.65v have seen a rapid issue develop within a week of use
1.6v is reported by many and high number have NO ISSUES....so to me absolute max is 1.6v (though I would not use it)
thats pure speculation.Quote:
Originally Posted by Cracker
I have been running my E6600 off/on S5 B1 engineering sample w/ 1.6vcore for 10 months now on a p5b-dlx on air w/ a tuniq tower or scythe infinity. Can i say what i am running my CPU at is safe? No! But you cant say that it isnt safe either.
Anything over 1.6vcore doesnt really help with overclocking, hence why i am at 1.6vcore.
It is rather funny listening to people say what they "feel" is a good voltage. NOBODY HERE CAN SAY WHAT IS SAFE/NOT SAFE.
Do whatever you think is right. There has not been a strong link between voltage of c2d and sudden CPU death. Me personally, I have no problems taking the voltage up on the c2d's. Hell I would run on 1.7vcore 24/7 if it gave me a higher overclock. I think that type of vcore puts a lot of strain on other components, such as PSU and mobo, and thats what is more likely to cause CPU death vs the CPU itself.
wow you need that much volts for 3.6ghz, that's nuts. my e6600 only needs 1.35v for 3.6ghz. then again you have a 6800 :rolleyes:Quote:
Originally Posted by mele
Boy do I wish I had a P5B :(
not all cpus are created equally..maybe this was binned at near its max speed and needsome juice to get it higherQuote:
Originally Posted by Solarfall
actually it's now at 1.32v and fully stable :DQuote:
Originally Posted by Solarfall
I wish my cpu was that sweet..congrats..never really got a sweet cpu like thatQuote:
Originally Posted by Solarfall
Quote:
Originally Posted by irev210
True, by Intel can and they have.
Yah, and they also say 1.35V MAX on the intel box also.Quote:
Originally Posted by dekruyter
You can believe whatever you want to believe, but there is no magic # where you will hit CPU death zone.
Its a published tech spec for goodness sake.
Either or, as I said in my previous post, do what makes you feel comfortable.
L623 batch, one of the first out.....Quote:
Originally Posted by Solarfall
yeah i know what you mean :D , my previous chip was really power hungry too. i had it running at 3.05mhz and i had to pump 1.61 to it in order to keep it fully stable.Quote:
Originally Posted by nealh
that's nasty! heheQuote:
eah i know what you mean , my previous chip was really power hungry too. i had it running at 3.05mhz and i had to pump 1.61 to it in order to keep it fully stable.
:nuts: Previous :nuts:Quote:
Originally Posted by Solarfall
I have used 1.6v on a box cooler on my E6600 to reach 3.8Ghz :D .
But just for a few hours, i think after reading this topic ill stay under the 1.6v.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Solarfall View Post
my previous chip was really power hungry too. i had it running at 3.05mhz and i had to pump 1.61 to it in order to keep it fully stable.
sorry but don't fully understand what you mean by this :wth:Quote:
Originally Posted by DerekT
i run 1.55v without issue 24/7...
YMMV though.
what cpu and setupQuote:
Originally Posted by Revv23
Your previous CPU is death and hadn't survive the high voltage ;)Quote:
Originally Posted by Solarfall
LOL, actually sold it to someone for a insane amount of cash :DQuote:
Originally Posted by GNU
I would run 1.55v 24-7 on the quad, but heatdump is just retarded at those voltages, so I just run 3300 @ 1.34v :(Quote:
Originally Posted by Revv23
Now on an E6600, I ran 1.54-1.63 24-7, but running 1.65 or even higher is asking for trouble...
Hard luck, nice ;)Quote:
Originally Posted by Solarfall
im running mine at 1.55 atm.
if it drops dead il try to rma it if i dont get RMA il buy a new one.
got thinking about this issue "is xxx amount of voltage safe.
can some one really say for sure that it is the high voltage that kills chips. what about heat?
usually high volts means high temperature at the same time. so the question is which one actually is the killer.
high voltage or the heat?
i would say that is has to be a combination of both of them that is the cpu killer? what do you gues think is my logic faulty? personally i would never increase the voltage over 1.6v with conroe, mayby if i would have some serious cooling at my disposal, singe stage or LN.
the issue is the combination of heat and voltage...
heat alone is bad..add extra voltage and you have reall issues
there was an intel engineer at Anandtech who wrote about the issue..voltage alone, heat alone can be damaging..both together can be a disaster...
How long have you run that voltage in you sig for ?Quote:
Originally Posted by nealh
I am running 1.55 bios 1.52 loaded at 3.6ghz
my setup has been up initially for 2-3 weeks ..then I had to RMA becasue I tried a sync mode and my board gave an unrecoverable(and I tried everything) C1 errorQuote:
Originally Posted by sreedx2
New board has been running 2 weeks...so total of 1 mo..non 24/7(weekdays typically from 5-6 hrs..weekends, 16- 48hrs
I think 1.52(1.51875 bios setting..bios reports 1.53v...load droops to 1.48/1.5v per SG) is probably safe on water for the amount of time I run the box
And if you cooled your heat CPU/NB (my NB has 1,72 24/7) with water that's maybe not bad or ?
GNU..I have read from Tony/RGone...over 1.5v on the NB will shorten its like 24/7....becarefulQuote:
Originally Posted by GNU
The effects of electrostatic migration are not transitory in systems that are running 24/7. Simply restarting the system, or turning it off for a few hours will not lessen the effects. The effects are cumulative. Electrostatic discharge is the characteristic (affect) and electrostatic migration is the effect. Given a system running 24/7 with highly volted CMOS substrates to the point of highly cumulative electrostatic discharge will bring forth the effect of electrostatic migration in the longer term and this is what permanently damages the CPU.
The characteristic (affect) will lessen in time, however the effect will not. Since the effect is cumulative, there WILL (in time) be a lessening of processor validity in data streaming and more adverse effects on the silicon. Very highly overvolted CMOS substrates will find the effect far more quickly than those who moderately operate the voltages.
You will see the effect before the affect. In other words, if you run a highly volted CMOS substrate you will see issues result. The system runs fine for days and then for some strange reason, it reboots. The games run fine and then for some strange reason (without software or hardware change) the FPS lower, etc. You shut your system down for a day or two and when you start it back up, it runs smoother and faster FPS etc. There are many more effects but I am sure this is clear.
Regarding life expectancies of the highly volted silicon substrate? One cannot, with any certainty gauge the life of such parts. Silicon Substrates do not have a life such as humans and animals etc. have. In their physical nature (with regards to electrostatic discharge and many other atomic level migrations) they are endowed with a half life, so you can consider their span as radioactive decay for purposes of determining possible length of minimal error use.
For example:
Given:
10,000 New CMOS's from the same fabrication silicon wafer. Their half life is the time that would pass before 5,000 of them fail. So, based on how long people have working CMOS's of the same fabrication silicon wafer, the half life of your CMOS could easily be 10 or more years (non overclocked).
This is why maximal voltages are given by the manufacturer. Be clear that the above does not mean that you will damage the CMOS in the shorter term. The problem is that one can not differentiate which is the silicon substrate that will last the long term and the one that will not. Highly overvolt the one that will and you very likely will still have the CPU for longer than you will want it but then you have the ones that are on the short end of the standard deviation (short end of the stick if you will) and the high overvolt will return errors and finally issue more frequent hardware interrupts.
It's the luck of the draw :)
My E4300 is currently running under load @77C~ with 1.55v~ with stock cooler, it's covered by Intel's 3 year limited warranty so I'm not worried :D
"Their half life is the time that would pass before 5,000 [out of 10,000] of them fail"
Sorry to disagree, but the average 1/2 life of a cpu would be the same whether there are 10,000 or 5,000 or 1 of them. The units of decay are in "time" not "number of units". I think you just miss-stated a bit. I.E. (per your example), the half life of Plutonium is the same, whether you have one pound (or say a Mole) or whether you have 10 pounds (or say10 Moles). It is a subatomic property of the material. However, I do not know if a cpu degrades according to an approximate, mathematical exponential formula?
Quote:
Originally Posted by stealthbomber
Nice joke - but it's not -> http://cache-www.intel.com/cd/00/00/...0372_50372.pdf
1.55VCore voids the warranty - as it´s outside of Intel`s Specs :eek:
Ya, unless you fried your chip then they will find out that you use more voltages that its limit. otherwise, they cant tell.Quote:
Originally Posted by Pete@X
How would they (Intel) know the CPU has been damaged over time due to heavily overvolted/overclocked usage when someone RMA's the 2-3 year old chip?
I am speaking towards the decay from the effect of electrostatic migration due to discharge, not the entire CPU life. Substrates of the silicon, not the entire CPU. The half life of such components that are subjected to the discharge and their error returns. The half-life is of a standard population of testing, not a single CPU. And no, a CPU does in point of fact, not degrade according to an mathematical formula.Quote:
Originally Posted by dekruyter
If you read my words, you will note that I say that you may "consider their span as radioactive decay for purposes of determining possible length of minimal error use". Clearly my words show that this is a comparative analysis, not a discrete one. It is for purposes of understanding, not specifying discretely.
:stick:
some times you just have to show yourself :-P
vdroop mod bios 1.7 ...windows 1.69 idle ....1.68v orthos loaded..
Quote:
Originally Posted by DerekT
Regarding: "The half-life is of a standard population of testing", and the rest of your post.
Thanks for the info, and I think I understand what you are saying. But you seem to be couching it in terms of production quality control of thousands of units, not the life of a single CPU. And that's what we, or at least I, am discussing, or want to learn about. We are discussing the affect of voltage on our very own CPU, not a company's ability to predict the failure or error rate on "X" number of units produced, given (provided) a specified voltage specification. Further, it seems the voltage is "fine" tuned to the CPU (after production), rather than the cpu being designed/produced to the tight tolerance of a voltage spec.
So the questions continue regarding the life expectancy and affects of voltage increases beyond spec. of a single cpu; such as the affects of electromigration, as you say.
You have a valid request dekruyter. Unfortunately, the best we can do with a single CPU is hope it will respond well. There is no method to fundamentally ascertain the degree of CPU declination with regards to a singular sample. One can not apply statistical determination at that level.Quote:
Originally Posted by dekruyter
One can only speculate. I was attempting to show the method that is used (by CPU design engineers) to bring about CPU degradation in a standard population of testing. Raising the voltages and setting the environment for failure beyond a point of error.
The simple request that is sought in this thread is not (in my view) possible. One can only theorize maximal voltages. You will find some who are able to run 1.6V (on air) without any mid-long-term effects (5 or more years) and others with the same fab/batch experiencing issues with lesser settings.
In the industry, the prevailing view has usually been a +.2V on .65nm products with decent core thermal extraction via air/medium water. +.4V on .65nm products with high end water and +.5 on LN/High end thermal removal with freeze attributes holding discharge in a more marginalized environment.
It's still a crap shoot though.
I've been running 9 x 400Mhz (3.6Ghz) @ 1.52vcore set in bios (droop = 1.46-1.47v) for the last 6 -7 months on my L626 E6600 with only good air cooling in a closed up coolermaster case and I'm still not having any problems, in fact its doing 1.58vcore @ 3.75Ghz still on good air cooling with the system in my signature and its stable enough for my usage - PCMark05 entire test suite is enough proof for me cause' I never have a need to run it at full load for 24/7 usage anyway. That cpu test suite in PCMark05 pro version is better at peak stability testing than orthos imo with 4 threads running concurrently.
If the overclocked system is performing to your daily requirements then its good enough for the individual user irrespective of what any expert dictates to you.