Printable View
This may have been already discussed, but does this put a damper on your plans to upgrade to i7? Seems pretty scary for what is likely to be a big investment.
"Intel is adivising mobo-makers and memory vendors alike about their new X58+Core i7 combo and to abide to a strict 1.65V limit on memory voltages, beyond which there is the risk of burning out the CPU."
ouch!
http://www.theinquirer.net/gb/inquir...damage-nehalem
really bad news for overclockers :(
I will stay with the old skool line of processors, mobo and RAM, till Core i7 get out of "beta" stage and support 1600+ RAM ;)
Apparently Asus is running 1.7v RAM in their Labs. What a bunch of crap. haha
This reminds me of the 3.3v jumper on the S939 DFI. If you used that with high memory voltage, while at the same time using only stock voltage to the CPU, you damaged the mem controller.
Clearly, Intel's onboard memory controller is suffering from something similar.
This sucks, but there's no telling yet of how caerfull we should be with this. Maybe it's all within xx % safety range.
Well, first is the inQ. Then, 1.7 could be enough for 2ghz ram.
what the hell??? only 1.65v :eek: thats terrible for overclocking !!!!!!!!!
The InQ just picked up the story from another site. The pic tells all though. I doubt I would be brave enough to put 1.7v through a $1000 oem cpu 24/7 under those rather dire warnings. That tells me that Intel knows that the i7 is sensitive as hell to mem controller voltage and will likely suffer damage unlike prior models. That gives me a good deal of pause for moving to this as the new overclocking platform which I normally be doing. I'm sure though that this too will have it's share of guinea pigs to see what the limits really are. In any case, this really puts a damper on my enthusiasm at least for now.Quote:
Originally Posted by RealTelstar
This is terrible!
But won't this result in high-end memory producers making low(er) voltage DDR3?
I hope...Quote:
Originally Posted by B.E.E.F.
Might not be all bad then. Perhaps we'll start to see some high(ish)-perf DDR3L spec memory.
1.65V? I bet my Diablo's won't even boot with that. :(
Bummer.
Pretty sad, but this could work out in the end. Either way, it's not going to be a great start.
Well, what some of you are missing are, Default speed on the ram are 1333mhz, and DDR3 are "default" voltage 1.5 from scratch, so using cl6 or 7 will work at these low speeds.
I guess this also give more reason to go with the "xtreme" unlocked multiplier versions if possible.
W00t :D
Now I have no reason to buy i7. I'll keep my money in my pocket.
i won't be buying it. I still think a 4ghz penryn will be faster than a 3.2ghz nehalem in my precious video gamez :)
This is why I've said I have no interest in Nehalem :p: In all honesty though, 1.8v is likely perfectly fine to use. Intel probably just trying to kill off some % of their RMAs due to dimwitted OCers.
Moderators can erase this thread;)Quote:
Originally Posted by SF3D
OMG that is piece of crap then..
I think being naive and gullible at the same time just hit a new level.
I'd say C2 is good enough at least 6-12 months more (how unxtreme of me..). I don't want to join the i7 beta testing, too much money. The i7 will be fast though, no doubt.
It's not the same situation as when C2 showed up, this time it's more new technology involved and it will take time before everything works fine and DDR3 prices drops.
Dunno about the CPU's, but the first mobos will get old very fast.;) Name a mobo with a new socket that actually was really good . . I guess there aren't many.
It's not a problem for those who upgrade twice a year tho.
xgman, thanks for posting this pic and starting this thread. :up:
I want you to know that this is just my two cents and I thank everybody for reading my opinion.
In no way I want to start any kind of negative discussion or cause the impression that I'm smarter than anybody.
In this community called XS, I consider myself an apprentice. :worship:
This warning doesn't bother or discourage me at all.
When I bought my actual DDR3 memory, I didn't spend a fortune because I was already expecting that it wouldn't be compatible or adequate for use on the upcoming i7 platform.
I just wanted to learn how DDR3 behaves on a daily usage setup, but without taking the risk of throwing it away in a few months.
The chipset and architectural changes will be big on i7, and we should all be prepared to fight some long battles setting up memory in the first Nehalem desktop (and server) systems. :bsod:
Most of the problems we had on AMD platforms will now "haunt" Intel.
Setups like "triple-channel" for example, will probably require stupidly high quality memory in order to be stable, and lots of tweaking for sure.
IMHO the whole DDR3 memory scene will (must) improve a lot in the following months.
Lower voltage and higher performance is the mandatory way to go for Intel, and since the Core architecture was released they're on the right path (again IMHO).
I wouldn't be surprised to find memory manufacturers soon releasing 3GB or 6GB kits (or maybe greater), with 2000+ MHz stock speed, functioning at a mere 1.4 or 1.5v.
Many people think voltage is the cure for every successful OC.
Of course that many components in fact need the extra power to be sucessfully overclocked.
In what concerns RAM, and from what I learned on my latest experiences while testing high-speed and high-capacity DDR2, I could see that most of the kits wouldn't OC better no matter what voltage I'd throw at them.
Some IC's simply don't react to more volts.
Adjusting skews, carefully setting up timings and learning how to deal with some settings that simply have different names from one MB brand to another, is much more important (and hard) than give more juice to the components.
Mid and high-end motherboards with P45 and X48 chipsets need a lot of tweaking in order to make memory perform well.
This will be probably even much harder on the X58.
But, no matter how hard the fight will be, I'm anxious to experiment with Intel's new babies! ;)
Come on guys and let's be positive.
We're about to spend some huge amounts of money just to be cool and up-to-date. :D
Intel certainly is working very closely to the memory manufacturers, and they're probably trying to create the need for i7 certified RAM kits to emerge.
New architecture, new socket, new memory, new... God knows what.
Marketing BS soon to come. :ROTF:
At least let us hope that the performance improvements are worth the change.
If they do I'll have no problem buying a platform that requires me to be careful with the memory voltage I setup.
Well, enough BS from myself already. :p:
Sorry for this huge post, that may not make any sense at all. :shrug:
DDR3 is still way too expensive, any C2D chip (even the E2xxx/E4xxx/E5xxx budget chips) @3GHz+ is good for at least another 12-18 months, if you have an overclocked kentfield/yorkfield might as well forget about i7 until at least the 2nd revision. ;)
4GB was barely enough for my Vista64 install, adding another 2GB made it a lot better, I'd imagine Windows 7 would benefit with 6GB+ of ram.
I could buy 4x2GB PC8000 DDR2 modules for just a little over £100, a set of 3x2GB DDR3 modules still cost a small fortune!
cool im get another low vid q6600 anyway
Yes, I agree.Quote:
Originally Posted by stealthbomber
The original point of overclocking was to push cheaper parts until they could compete with the top-end ones. Are we all forgetting this? I have more respect for someone who can get insane speeds from a low-end CPU than someone who jumps on the latest thing, has more money than sense and feels the need to impress people on the Internet.
i7 doesn't even interest me, nor does DDR3, and it'll be quite a while until I even care at all.
well, here is a good point:
http://www.edmunds.com/media/ownersh...glabel.500.jpg
Will you buy the audio R8 that goes with it?
should be more and more ddr3 coming into the market, and it will be around for a few years i read.
I have no interest in core i7 at the moment. I'll more than likely jump at the end of '09 or Q1 '10 if the performance and maturity is there for the 2nd gen CPU and motherboards but for now I am pretty happy with my QX9650.
Hopefully this will spur more DDR3 options though. I'd like to move to DDR3 and the x48 Rampage extreme in January if the DDR3 prices are decent and the RAM will carry over to the x58 platform.
Considering most people haven't bought DDR3 since it's been so damn expensive I don't think it's going to deter many people since they haven't laid down the green for DDR3 in some sort of pre-emptive buy before it the i7 comes out.
You made your point Dee, and everybody has the right to express their opinion, just like I did.
You're right. The original point of overclocking was in fact to achieve higher performance than expected with low budget components, and be able to compete with expensive high-end parts without spending the extra cash.
I for example admire people that achieve 100% OC's on Intel E2140 or E2160 processors, on air.
Anyway why shouldn't people than can afford expensive hardware try to push it even further?
Overclocking is a much wider concept now.
I suppose there are mainly two types of overclockers.
Type "A" want to reach the physical limits, break world records, show off (in a good sense) with screenshots and mostly suicide shots, spend lots of time just to get 10 or 20MHz more, and are real artists.
Benching is an art that I respect.
I really admire some XS members that have proven to be absolute geniuses.
Type "B" seek 24/7 stability, and spend their time trying to find the best OC combination that allows for some hardware longevity, but still pushing their hardware's capabilities to a higher level.
This is my type.
Since one of my main computer tasks is Folding@Home, I'm really interested in i7 and DDR3 bandwidth possibilities.
I'm pretty sure that if the client is optimized, I'll be able to process much more WU's in less time.
The company that supplies electricity to my home appreciates it, but it's a cause I really want to believe in.
Sorry for the offtopic.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dee
Now here's a guy that thinks the way I do.:up:Quote:
Originally Posted by miguelca
I want a machine that I can run 24/7 at 100% load with decent temps and just below that "ragged edge" where parts fail, OS's deterioiate,etc..
Worlds records aren't important to me although I appreciate the work that the guys go thru to achieve them.
Yes.
All components are expensive when new. The Conroe's weren't any cheaper on release date so what makes you think the Nehalem setups will be. You probably won't be seeing low end Nehalem/bloomfield based setups at least for another 6-12months, and yeah the current Penryn line is pretty decent. All depends on your needs. For some having better processor memory bandwidth makes a world of difference. And who cares about a theoretical 1.65v IMC limit, it just means more companies will be interested in marketing lower voltage memory dimms which in my humble opinion is a fantastic thing. Why use 2.0v if you can do the same thing with 1.5v? It's just simply inefficient, and at present not many ddr3 ic manufacturers have had the need to follow JEDEC 1.5v standard because they could get away with not. If this enforces the JEDEC standard more so I'm all for it. I even look more forward to the new JEDEC 1.2v low voltage DDR3 standard that was announced recently, hopefully IC manufacturers make good use of it in the near future.
Edit: Sure it sucks to be an early DDR3 adopter hearing this, but you don't go and adopt new technology early without knowing that theres a big chance it'll be changed and you'll get screwed. Thats the joys of early technological adoption in all its splendour.
I'm with the people who say "wait." The first gen always has problems. Plus, it's not that much of an improvement over current C2s.
I have a 939 rig (I know, how un-XS of me) but I'm not exactly cash-rich to put it mildly and I think good deals will abound when the second gen i7 comes out.
To be fair there has been numerous deaths and decapitations of small children because of that.Quote:
Originally Posted by Drwho?
I for one, will be giving i7 a miss for now.
Be aware that this may be the reason why it was hinted that not just the EE's will overclock. All 3 of the first gen chips should OC via multipliers (possibly to varying degrees of height) because you can't force the memory voltage up too high. And remember that DDR3 will gradually clock high at lower voltage as they improve the manuf process.
http://forums.overclockers.co.uk/sho...7&postcount=86
Maybe theres hope
Maybe, lets hope all will be OK :)Quote:
Originally Posted by sunn
Remember though, he is also trying to sell the hardware too, pre-orders are up on the very same website. Lets hope they warranty any hardware they get back, if the worst case senario comes to fruition.....
I imagine it is all much ado about nothing though :cool:
Lots of opinions here. In any case this is the first time I've seen such an in your face warning like this which tells me that something is up, and maybe these cpu's are going to start out as pretty sensitive little buggers. In the past, Ive been nothing but an early adopter, generally voiding warranties on high end stuff right from day one, but this gives me pause nonetheless. I suppose if the performance was great enough then maybe this mitigates the possible lower vdimm requirement to some extent, but now for me it has become a uncharacteristic "wait and see" as opposed to otherwise "must get".
High vdimm was a problem with the early Athlon64 chips (new IMC) failing, then a few revisions later...
Intel better get ready for RMA city if this is true lol because none of us are going to heed this warning.
ouch! Pricey!
http://azerty.nl/producten/product_d...ocket-136.html
If memory voltage kills the CPU I'd blame ASUS not Intel as they designed the board incorrectly.
just like AMD
bump the vcore as you bump the RAM volts and you'll be fine
i bet this will be the same
*sits, watches and see :)
I did explain here: http://www.xtremesystems.org/forums/...190762&page=61Quote:
Originally Posted by RealTelstar
Two quick things:
First, my memory company has been sitting on (not releasing) a 1GB DDR3-1800 CL9 1.5V product for a few months now..
We haven't seen there being enough demand for this product in the dual-channel enthusiast market,
so we're probably just gonna wait to launch this product and make it a tri-channel kit, synchronized with the Nehalem release date.
Secondly, the limitation on the memory voltage doesn't create much of a limit on the CPU overclock that you can achieve.
The memory has its own base clock multiplier, which you can lower if you don't want to overclock the memory while overclocking the CPU.
Third, even at very low (for DDR3) memory speeds, the triple channel and IMC get more memory bandwidth than you could dream of:
No i7 for me. I'll be standing there getting the dirt cheap trickle down quads from the bleeding edge upgraders.:up:
Quote:
Originally Posted by zads27
Holy crap that red dot is off the chart! Looks good man :up:.
Now it's time to hurry off and ditch my unopened DDR3 D9GTS.