Gigabyte EX58-UD5/Extreme Discussion Thread

[rge]

measured using multimeter real cpu vtt yet ? probably to more accurately depict the real value ?

Yeah, maybe GB thought the change represented better accuracy, that would make most sense. Though I thought the variation board to board would be more than .005v.

If asking if I have measured it...no, too lazy to measure or to even look up where to measure...have a fluke though. It would be interesting to know how accurate the board is...but knowing I still need 1.355 in bios to be stable regardless of the real value, kinda stifles my curiosity some.

[yomny]

For 4.2ghz 24/7 I need 1.376vcore load, 1.42 bios and 1.35qpi/vtt. I will be using it 24/7 as long as I have the chip...when i am not benching at higher settings. My guess is most running at 4ghz+ on this forum are doing so long term or as long as they have the chip.

1.35 qpi/vtt is intels max...but some need in low 1.4's range, it is variable per cpu. One person needed crazy high like 1.7, then bought another cpu and only needed 1.3's. Personally, I would have no problem running it in low to mid 1.4's for 4ghz and some are, but just dont need to on mine... each person has to decide on their own risk tolerance.

And DRAM v should be within .5v of qpi/vtt, benching I am keeping mine within about .35.

Benching, between spi 32m, both chess stress test/benchmarks, cinebench, pc mark, etc, I probably have 24hrs+ at prime type loads with 1.96-2v DRAM (to get uncore at 4500mhz and mem at 2000mhz) and 1.62-1.64qpi/vtt, 1.66vcore...cpu still Oces at exact same settings. I wouldn't run these 24/7 or even close to it...but benching I have had no problems with those volts.

Thanks a mil for this little guide it's been quite helpful, im a bit confused though as to why some cpu's need qpi/vtt higher than others isn't the qpi/vtt a voltage that allows the boards to boot at higher bclk, or is this voltage setting communicating between the board's bclk(fsb) and the vtt of the cpu? sorry for some reason i think qpi is like FSB on previous chips and vtt is cpu termination voltage, normally these two wouldn't be together.

Regardless when i set the qpi/vtt to 1.42 is still in the safe range of the boards settings, guiding myself by the colors where yellow is good, purple is still safe, then red means too darn high. According to this up to 1.46 i think im still in the purple area. When i set the votlage settings to auto the board adjusted to 1.42 qpi to get to 213 bclk but it wouldn't adjust higher than that if i tried a higher bclk.

[godsfist]

21 x 191 rock solid

20 x 200 no way

They are both 4GHz... WHY WHY WHY?

[rge]

21 x 191 rock solid

20 x 200 no way

They are both 4GHz... WHY WHY WHY?

yeah, makes no sense, but many have seen same thing.

The stock multis suck for overclocking. Most with i920 report they cant get 20 multi stable or need much more vcore to do so. Many can run 19x211 or 21x191 with much lower vcore than 20x200, if they can even get 20x200 stable. Same with my i940. If using 23 (turbo) or 21 multi I can use roughly 7 notches lower vcore for the same mhz than using the stock 22 multi.

That is assuming in your case it is not also the bclk holding you back...but you could also try 19x211 and see.

I dont think anyone has explained it so that it makes sense ...to me anyways...but no question the issue is there.

[Bjynne]

yeah, makes no sense, but many have seen same thing.

The stock multis suck for overclocking. Most with i920 report they cant get 20 multi stable or need much more vcore to do so. Many can run 19x211 or 21x191 with much lower vcore than 20x200, if they can even get 20x200 stable. Same with my i940. If using 23 (turbo) or 21 multi I can use roughly 7 notches lower vcore for the same mhz than using the stock 22 multi.

That is assuming in your case it is not also the bclk holding you back...but you could also try 19x211 and see.

I dont think anyone has explained it so that it makes sense ...to me anyways...but no question the issue is there.

Yes, I too can`t make 20X200 stable with the same volts as 21X191. 20X200 needs 1.44v load and 21X191 needs just 1.36v for the same clock.

[rge]

Thanks a mil for this little guide it's been quite helpful, im a bit confused though as to why some cpu's need qpi/vtt higher than others isn't the qpi/vtt a voltage that allows the boards to boot at higher bclk, or is this voltage setting communicating between the board's bclk(fsb) and the vtt of the cpu? sorry for some reason i think qpi is like FSB on previous chips and vtt is cpu termination voltage, normally these two wouldn't be together.

Regardless when i set the qpi/vtt to 1.42 is still in the safe range of the boards settings, guiding myself by the colors where yellow is good, purple is still safe, then red means too darn high. According to this up to 1.46 i think im still in the purple area. When i set the votlage settings to auto the board adjusted to 1.42 qpi to get to 213 bclk but it wouldn't adjust higher than that if i tried a higher bclk.

VTTd, quote from intel white paper
"Voltage for the digital portion of the integrated
memory controller, QPI link and Shared Cache
with respect to VSS"

[Nitro68]

Hello !

I tried a lot of things with my i7 920 and EX58-UD5 but it seems I can't boot (the screen never turns on) with BCLK >= 187.

Here are my settings for 20*186 (ok), but 20*187 fails (19*187 too).

QPI x36
Uncore x14
RAM x8
8 8 8 21 1T
LLC : On
VCore : 1,4v
QPI/VTT : 1.36v
IOH : 1.2v
DRAM : 1.64v
QPI PLL : 1.2v
ICH Core : 1.2v
CPU PLL : 1.88v

I tried even higher voltage but it just does not turn the screen on. The only way I found is to set QPI on Slow Mode... Do you think I should try a different setting for something ? Or test something ? I would like to know if the CPU or the Motherboard is the problem...


At the moment, my 24/24 OC is 21*181 (=3.8Ghz) with VCore 1.375v, QPI/VTT 1.34v, Uncore *18 and RAM*8. I already tested my Ram @800Mhz 8 8 8 21 1T 1.64v so I don't think it is the problem.
BIOS : F5g (same thing with F5C or F4e)

Thanks for any advice

[SteveRo]

21 x 191 rock solid

20 x 200 no way

They are both 4GHz... WHY WHY WHY?

I can't do 20x200 either - something weird about that.
I can get lower and higher to work but something weird about the multi's at 20x200.
I am sure the Bermuda Triangle is responsible.

[rge]

Hello !

I tried a lot of things with my i7 920 and EX58-UD5 but it seems I can't boot (the screen never turns on) with BCLK >= 187.

It is likely your cpu, simply got a low bclk one. I will assume you have a Gigabyte mobo, since you posted here...and ?UD5.

You can try 19x190, raise vcore 1.45v, vtt/qpi to 1.45v, and DRAM on 1.66, try uncore on both 16x and 17x (not 18x), and qpi PLL to 1.18 and just try and boot. My guess is it will fail, or make it to 188 or 190, then fail...your practical limit you have probably already found, just got unlucky with cpu lottery regarding bclk. But you can try those settings just to see. Also can try F3 bios, I know it is not bclk limited, as their are some bioses that are, and I am not familiar with ones you are using...you have diff GB mobo than me.

[revenant]

Soooo... winblows had an update for me this am... well, three, but one of them was for "realtek ethernet" drivers... which promptly broke both my nics... I was able to roll the driver back easily, but wtf? anyone else get and have issues with this update? it was for vista64.

[Leeghoofd]

Again one of the reasons I turn off automatic updates and select them myself, in fact my XP64 has never received an update...with Vista it's required

[lowdog]

There is a straight answer and it's been made clear several hundred times on this site alone lol

Keep the QPI/VTT .05v below cpu vcore, Intels limit is 1.35v VTT and 1.55vcore, but there is a cushion on that figure; mine in practice is 1.45v vtt and 1.6v core. This is water cooled and voltages like this shouldn't be used for long term usage no matter what cooling.

Use my advice at your own risk

So this is your advice?

Where is the statement of fact from any authority (lets say Intel) pertaining to the highlighted in "bold text" part of your post. I'm not being critical here just curious as to where this actually comes from. I have my vcore at 1.31250v bios LLC on and QPI at 1.32500v for 195 x 20 - 3.9GHz stable.

[GAR]

finally got my cpu to 4ghz stable, 21x191 got me there with 1.392v at 100% load.

[s3rv3r]

21 x 191 rock solid

20 x 200 no way

They are both 4GHz... WHY WHY WHY?

Me too, i can`t get stable with 20 x 200, but 21 x 191 is stable with lower vcore.

[flashnc]

had the same issue with the new update ( and yes i dl them, not on automatic update) thought what the hell, i'll run the updates...and yup...killed my ethernet....i just deleted that and went back to the previous ethernet drivers....

[ReverendMaynard]

So this is your advice?

Where is the statement of fact from any authority (lets say Intel) pertaining to the highlighted in "bold text" part of your post. I'm not being critical here just curious as to where this actually comes from. I have my vcore at 1.31250v bios LLC on and QPI at 1.32500v for 195 x 20 - 3.9GHz stable.

Yeah it's my advice. Either take it or don't, it's your choice.

[hlonipha]

Hello !

I tried a lot of things with my i7 920 and EX58-UD5 but it seems I can't boot (the screen never turns on) with BCLK >= 187.

Here are my settings for 20*186 (ok), but 20*187 fails (19*187 too).

QPI x36
Uncore x14
RAM x8
8 8 8 21 1T
LLC : On
VCore : 1,4v
QPI/VTT : 1.36v
IOH : 1.2v
DRAM : 1.64v
QPI PLL : 1.2v
ICH Core : 1.2v
CPU PLL : 1.88v

I tried even higher voltage but it just does not turn the screen on. The only way I found is to set QPI on Slow Mode... Do you think I should try a different setting for something ? Or test something ? I would like to know if the CPU or the Motherboard is the problem...


At the moment, my 24/24 OC is 21*181 (=3.8Ghz) with VCore 1.375v, QPI/VTT 1.34v, Uncore *18 and RAM*8. I already tested my Ram @800Mhz 8 8 8 21 1T 1.64v so I don't think it is the problem.
BIOS : F5g (same thing with F5C or F4e)

Thanks for any advice

I had the same exact issue, gave up and got a new cpu, no problems booting at 210+ bclk now. currently running it at 192x21. Will start to play with it this week again and see what I can get out of the new one. Batch is on my sig

[Astennu]

I had a strange crash today. I was playing DOWII and the system locked up. It was running 3.8 GHz stable for a week now.

But after that crash i could not boot anything above stock speeds (CPU MHz)

I think its fragged somehow. I will try to flash the bios to see if that helps but i think something broke down. Max temp where 60c. V-core was 1.35v in bios witch will give 1.28-1.3v load. VTT @ 1.22 nothing special there. Ram voltage 1.64v.

Its eighter the CPU or the board got fragged badly.

[tipes]

I had a strange crash today. I was playing DOWII and the system locked up. It was running 3.8 GHz stable for a week now.

But after that crash i could not boot anything above stock speeds (CPU MHz)

I think its fragged somehow. I will try to flash the bios to see if that helps but i think something broke down. Max temp where 60c. V-core was 1.35v in bios witch will give 1.28-1.3v load. VTT @ 1.22 nothing special there. Ram voltage 1.64v.

Its eighter the CPU or the board got fragged badly.

You could try taking the bios battery out and leaving it out overnight as this sometimes re sets the board to factory condition - which may or may not do the trick. Worth a try though.

Mark

[Astennu]

You could try taking the bios battery out and leaving it out overnight as this sometimes re sets the board to factory condition - which may or may not do the trick. Worth a try though.

Mark

Yeah that helps sometimes. But i flashed the bios again this time from the F4 official to the latest F5g. And now its stable again.

I guess the bios got fragged somehow.

[SteveRo]

Yeah that helps sometimes. But i flashed the bios again this time from the F4 official to the latest F5g. And now its stable again.

I guess the bios got fragged somehow.

I think I have scrogged my bios twice now.
The most recent time it reset itself from f5e to f2!

[tipes]

Yeah that helps sometimes. But i flashed the bios again this time from the F4 official to the latest F5g. And now its stable again.

I guess the bios got fragged somehow.

Great news that it is ok and you have recovered it.

Mark

[Astennu]

Great news that it is ok and you have recovered it.

Mark

Indeed. i was afraid i had killed the cpu or the board somehow. Never had this kind of bios corruption before. One minute its running fine and then it caches like this....

Anyway. Temps are now higher with the F5G bios. V-core seems to be the same. (1.28v) i wonder if the readout if correct. I'm giving 1.35v in the bios. I know board will show lower voltages under load but the difference is quite big.

[technut36]

does is matter what kind of i920 i get or are they all gonna oc the same

[technut36]

I am so frustrated trying to figure out whos values to u, there are so many post with all the bios setting, i am looking for a descent i920 oc to 3.8-4 ghz, on air.

could you guys please guide me choosing setting/tempelate that works and would fit me.