-
Xtreme X.I.P.
If I mandated people use calibrated DMMs to measure vCore under load, we'd have virtually no entries where people could be classified as "stable". It would be even less useful than what we've got now, which I believe is a reasonable compromise. Since we don't exist as members of a laboratory, I just use the highest number I'm presented with. When people say "xV BIOS / xV load" or whatever, I pick whichever is higher so that the chart errors as much as possible on the side of worst case scenario. As for heat, if you're going to fail at due to thermals, you'll probably be caught within 8 hours. It's not uncommon for a CPU to fail only after extended durations even way beyond 8 hours. My personal standard is 24 hours with 48 being better, and I've seen failures at 25-26 hours for example. It doesn't take that long for things to heat up and saturate thermal solutions. Maybe your chip is on the fence. If it is, you're not stable regardless of the cause. Your definition of stable, beep, is more of a definition of stable-ish, and that's not good enough for me.
Blend is better than small or large FFTs imo. Who cares if your CPU is stable if the memory system isn't. It's an unusable system either way, you know?
No, the system isn't perfect, but it would be unrealistic to expect members of a forum like this to contribute better information on average. This is an informal setting.
Last edited by Particle; 05-23-2011 at 06:13 AM.
Particle's First Rule of Online Technical Discussion:
As a thread about any computer related subject has its length approach infinity, the likelihood and inevitability of a poorly constructed AMD vs. Intel fight also exponentially increases.
Rule 1A:
Likewise, the frequency of a car pseudoanalogy to explain a technical concept increases with thread length. This will make many people chuckle, as computer people are rarely knowledgeable about vehicular mechanics.
Rule 2:
When confronted with a post that is contrary to what a poster likes, believes, or most often wants to be correct, the poster will pick out only minor details that are largely irrelevant in an attempt to shut out the conflicting idea. The core of the post will be left alone since it isn't easy to contradict what the person is actually saying.
Rule 2A:
When a poster cannot properly refute a post they do not like (as described above), the poster will most likely invent fictitious counter-points and/or begin to attack the other's credibility in feeble ways that are dramatic but irrelevant. Do not underestimate this tactic, as in the online world this will sway many observers. Do not forget: Correctness is decided only by what is said last, the most loudly, or with greatest repetition.
Rule 3:
When it comes to computer news, 70% of Internet rumors are outright fabricated, 20% are inaccurate enough to simply be discarded, and about 10% are based in reality. Grains of salt--become familiar with them.
Remember: When debating online, everyone else is ALWAYS wrong if they do not agree with you!
Random Tip o' the Whatever
You just can't win. If your product offers feature A instead of B, people will moan how A is stupid and it didn't offer B. If your product offers B instead of A, they'll likewise complain and rant about how anyone's retarded cousin could figure out A is what the market wants.
Posting Permissions
- You may not post new threads
- You may not post replies
- You may not post attachments
- You may not edit your posts
-
Forum Rules
Reply With Quote
Bookmarks