IntelBurnTest - The new stress-testing program

[Movieman]

You do not threaten my account TROLL (I did state this thread only)!

Advise you shut your mouth!

My advise to AG/OP, report him for derailing your thread which is about your kind FREE work!

You were warned but I sort of knew you'd be back and use the word so realistically you've banned yourself.
I've seen this before. It's what I call the marytr syndrone.
When warned the person feels compelled to push the matter even though they've been told they will be banned if they do so.
Done
My apologies to the rest here.
I repeat, my only purpose in posting in this thread was concern for the members investment in their hardware and my comments were based on good info from
two different engineers at Intel.

[Falkentyne]

I'm grateful for that, movieman.
I still remember when Linpack binaries first appeared, and I think they appeared during the beginning core 2 days, and there was a note saying that these binaries were used for *internal* CPU testing. But someone or something requested that they release them, and then came the "new stress tool released: now find if your cpu is truly stable! more accurate than prime" etc...

While I do understand Agentgod's point that this was used to be a time saving mechanism, I also fully understand the other person's post in that he said "there is no substitute for time."

I guess a question I can ask Movieman AND AgentGod is:
What is more harmful to a 1.45v 5 ghz CPU?
5 passes of Linpack/LinX/IBT, or 8 hours of prime 95?
Which will cause more degradation?

The problem of course is, even prime 95 can degrade cpu's if they are running highly out of specification. I've already degraded two 2600k's with prime, and neither one of them even saw a linpack run, except a quick 5 loop test at 4 ghz stock voltages, which was safe, and that was a gflop test. I'm lucky that I can still do 5 ghz at 1.45v. And since I'm a gamer, after all, I think some good old Black Ops and Battlefield 3 works better for me than burning my CPU up with hours of prime.

Of course, for folders, who crunch data that needs to be accurate, prime can be a good test, but I STILL remember a post on the [H], where a person who folded 24/7 at 5 ghz 1.5v, had to reduce his overclock to 4.6 ghz after 3 months, due to degradation.

Degradation has happened to enough people now, so that no one questions whether it's "real" or not (unlike that famous GNDS thread, where many of us were called incompetent overclockers, until the problem became so widespread, no one could deny it anymore).

I guess this is all old hat now. The BIG question is how Ivy Bridge will overclock, and how well the 22nm process tolerates voltages over long term. And of course, no one will know without guinea pigs to test their processors....

[some_one]

I guess a question I can ask Movieman AND AgentGod is:
What is more harmful to a 1.45v 5 ghz CPU?
5 passes of Linpack/LinX/IBT, or 8 hours of prime 95?
Which will cause more degradation?

That would IMO depend on the amount of current the application draws and how much the degradation is accelerated not only with overcurrent but time. Should be interesting to see how prime95 performs when fully optimized for AVX. BTW AFAIK Linpack is just a benchmark to measure throughput of floating point computation whilst giving an indication of instability and not as a bining tool.

While increased voltage will produce more current not many people seem to be interested in how much that current is but just interested in vcore. I would think overvoltage (a voltage that causes a junction to breakdown) will kill a cpu instantly while overcurrent would be more subtle by degrading and once degradation starts will only get worse with continually excessive load before finally failing.

So maybe the real question is how much current is too much, how far past maximum can you push and still have a decent life expectancy. Temperatures are likely to affect results too.

[GigaByte]

Movieman is beyond hilarious.... so im not even going to bother with my explanation, some peoples' "beliefs" are just.... ...

[Falkentyne]

True and Valid?
I fully agree with everything Movieman says. If you don't agree with him, then go blow up some chips on your own with your 8 hour linpacks. We don't need to hear about it. Seriously.

You know, insulting a mod of a forum is not the best way to keep membership here....

[TurboDiv]

I think that guy didint realize who Movieman was and that's why he went over his head...

Anyways, recently i started using this program, regardless of the dangers and i have also upgraded my RAM to 8gb from 4gb. Just by using more RAM i have noticed that my stable overclock from before wasnt stable when i used 6.5Gb ram with IBT. Now i am down by about 30mhz in order to stabilize 7 runs at 6.5GB ram (110Gflops/run). Also i found that if i stabalize my CPU with Prime 95, IBT would instantly blue screen with 101 error. IMO 5 runs per session of IBT in the course of 3-4 days(5 runs per day) is a better testing strategy for stability. This way you dont put a massive stress on your CPU at once, but rather spread it in a few days. Furthermore, the hardware would not "cook/degrage" as much and it would give you some idea of your stability. Same thing with Prime 95, it is better off to test for 1 week (30 minutes a day) rather than a 24 hour run that would damage your expensive CPU. If there is some sort of instability of the CPU it might not show up in the first day but it would eventually show up later on.

my 2cents