|
SRQ posted:Is there any way to change the FSB of a 440BX board without the option in the BIOS? I also checked for jumpers but didn't see anything. I'm pretty sure you're stuck if you don't have BIOS options - the 440BX doesn't officially support 133MHz bus. Eletriarnation fucked around with this message at 22:20 on Apr 5, 2012 |
#
¿
Apr 5, 2012 22:17
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ Apr 26, 2024 16:16 |
|
|
NihilCredo posted:God drat it, I bought a 6600k on Amazon literally six hours ago and it shipped three hours ago. Is it not possible with a Z170 board to just put the RAM at a lower multiplier?
|
|
#
¿
Dec 22, 2015 02:12
|
|
|
NihilCredo posted:If I OC my 6600k without touching the voltage at all (which obviously will mean just a small OC), then the system's idle power consumption should remain unaffected. Correct y/n? Yeah, I believe that's right. Idle lowers the multiplier to a very small value and all you're doing by overclocking a K-series is increasing the maximum allowed multiplier. I don't think the load power consumption will go up that much either if you're not touching voltage, considering Ohm's Law. Eletriarnation fucked around with this message at 21:38 on Jan 12, 2016 |
|
#
¿
Jan 12, 2016 21:34
|
|
|
B-Mac posted:So I have had a 2500k in the wifey's computer for the past 4 years or so and have never overclocked before. I went ahead and bought a Pure Rock Be Quiet! cooler to replace the stock Intel and decided to see if I could give this puppy a bit of an OC. It's running on a gigabyte P67A-D3-B3 Bios F7. I went ahead and just set the multiplier to 43 for the time being and didn't mess with any of the voltage settings, they are all left on auto. Running Prime95 Blend the temps are looking pretty good, staying in the mid 50s to low 60s but the VID stays sitting around 1.36 to 1.376 and I am wondering if that voltage is safe for this chip? Vcore is sitting around 1.26/1.27. I honestly have no idea. I am using HWINFO64 to monitor temps and voltages If it's still set to auto then it should be running at stock voltage. Those numbers don't sound like anything unusual to me so I think you're just fine. You can quite likely go higher, I have the same chip at stock voltage too and it's been set to 44x for years with a Hyper 212. Tcase for the 2500k is 72C so that's the temperature you should try not to exceed. If the RAM got through memtest and Prime95 just fine then I would consider it stable until seeing evidence that it isn't, and it's reasonable to expect that a lot of 1333MHz kits could do 1600 no problem.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 22, 2016 19:50
|
|
|
KingKapalone posted:Any recommendations? Noctua NA-SRC10. 3 for $7 on Amazon.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 6, 2016 21:50
|
|
|
Shumagorath posted:The OP said the limit was 72 though...? Intel lists maximum temperature for desktop procs in terms of Tcase, which is a temperature measured at the heatspreader and will therefore be lower than the temperature of the chip itself which is where your temperature sensors are. The 72 you're thinking about is roughly the rated Tcase for that processor. If you go look up a laptop processor which doesn't have a heatspreader it will tell you the maximum Tjunction, which is the temperature of the chip itself and typically 95C+ depending on model. Staying at 75C all the time wouldn't be great and being that hot under load might impact the stability of an OC, but it shouldn't put the chip in danger.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 27, 2016 19:12
|
|
|
Go to whatever voltage level you need to and buy OC insurance from Intel itself for when it dies, if you really want to feel safe.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 31, 2016 23:45
|
|
|
Intel Burn Test is actually able to overclock the P8Z68-V LX within Windows and change the max multiplier without rebooting in my experience. If you don't plan to mess with anything but the multiplier it might be an easier way to go; I don't recall the exact steps, but I'm pretty sure it was really straightforward.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 27, 2016 18:28
|
|
|
HMS Boromir posted:This took me a while to realize, but just for clarity's sake, did you mean Intel Extreme Tuning Utility? You're right, I saw Intel and thought "yeah the Intel utility, that thing is great" but I don't think the Burn Test has any OC capability. On many Sandy Bridge and newer systems, the XTU gives you access to multiplier and turbo power level settings from within Windows. It has even allowed access to some options on my two Dell Latitude laptops that I don't think I can get anywhere else, like what wattage to allow for turbo and how long of a duration to allow it for. I've been too scared of causing damage to really do anything with that though and as you would expect you can only access multipliers on K-chips. Agrajag posted:I suspect it's my cooler doing a poo poo job at cooling since I'm averaging 57C at idle with only Google Chrome open right now. What is your voltage looking like under load when overclocked? With my 2500K at 4.4GHz and "Auto" voltage using a Hyper 212+, I get 1.38V/60C under load and around 35C idle. From everything I've ever heard 1.4V or less should be safe for extended use on Sandy Bridge, so if you're not that high you might be able to bump it up a bit once you get the cooling sorted out. Eletriarnation fucked around with this message at 17:58 on Oct 29, 2016 |
|
#
¿
Oct 29, 2016 17:50
|
|
|
quote != edit
|
|
#
¿
Oct 29, 2016 17:55
|
|
|
There's really not a lot you can do to reduce the power consumption of a relatively new gaming computer without also reducing its ability to run games. You can try undervolting the processor if you have a motherboard that supports it, but this will severely limit any overclocking you have present/planned and won't do that much. Your best way to keep your office cool is to not run a gaming PC in it, vent the exhaust heat out of the office, or turn up the AC.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 5, 2016 04:06
|
|
|
It's hard to beat memtest86.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 18, 2016 01:34
|
|
|
Lungboy posted:I'm trying to squeeze the last bit of life out of my old system and failing to achieve what reports suggest should be possible. I have a q6600 on msi p965 platinum, 8gb crucial pc5300 ddr2 ram, with almost new corsair rmx650 psu. I've clocked it from 2.4 to 2.8ghz with no problem, but it won't boot if I try for 3ghz when 3.6 is apparently achievable. My bios seems very limited in the options available to me, no memory ratio etc. Do I just start upping voltages from auto until something works? The Q6600 supports SpeedStep so unless you disable that your multiplier and voltage will jump around some when the CPU isn't working hard. Without RAM multiplier settings (really? If so, that sucks - any overclocking board should have them) you will be limited in what you can do since when you bump up BCLK your RAM will go faster in lockstep with the CPU and will probably reach its limit first. If you find out that you can change the RAM multiplier, just bump it down as you reach the rated speed of the RAM so that the RAM is always running within spec while you find the CPU max. Once you have the CPU at its max, you can try tuning the RAM multiplier higher to see if it's possible but you don't want to have multiple potential sources of instability to rule out at once if you can help it. Note that if you have a tiny bit to spend, Q9400s (or Xeon X3350s if your board supports them, they're basically Q9450s) are cheap and will probably go a bit higher than your 65nm chip. Oh, also on older systems some people found that SpeedStep was a liability for stable overclocks from what I recall. If you can't get the CPU to do what you think it should and your memory is running within limits, you can try disabling it and seeing if that makes a difference. I'd recommend leaving it on if it doesn't make a stability difference to help keep your power bill down. Eletriarnation fucked around with this message at 16:28 on Nov 29, 2016 |
|
#
¿
Nov 29, 2016 16:21
|
|
|
SinineSiil posted:I suggested my friend to overclock his i7 3770K, to turn on the automatic OC stuff his Asus mobo has. He rushed out to do that and reported back his computer didn't start, no beeps just some clicks from apparently the GPU, I guess the fans trying to spin up. I let him reset the bios by removing the battery, but it still doesn't start... Auto OC is often a mistake on CPUs as the post following yours says. Tell your friend to just keep bumping the multiplier up at stock voltage until the system isn't stable and then back off 200MHz and leave it there if they're skittish. As long as you don't touch voltage the system can't possibly kill itself, it'll just effectively brownout if it gets too fast. e: another nice benefit of moving up 100MHz at a time and running a stress test for 5min each notch is that usually the stress test will crash before it gets so unstable that it won't even boot and you have to reset BIOS. Eletriarnation fucked around with this message at 01:04 on Feb 11, 2017 |
|
#
¿
Feb 11, 2017 00:54
|
|
|
DarkAvenger211 posted:Good to know. So before I get too far into this can anyone tell me what the different voltage labels mean? And what ones I should be looking out for. I'm seeing things like vCore, is this the voltage I would be tweaking a bit? Is there a maximum safe amount I should never go to? etc? vCore is the CPU voltage. I don't recall if that generation still has a separate Uncore, but if it does then that's the cache and memory controller. Most sources I've read consider anything 1.4V or less to be safe for 24/7 use on a 2500K, and I personally have one that has been running at 1.38V/4.4GHz for over 5 years now without problems so I would be inclined to agree. Going a bit higher might be fine too as long as temperatures stay under control; I would be scared to go as high as 1.5V personally, but that might just be an overabundance of caution. Eletriarnation fucked around with this message at 21:02 on Feb 28, 2017 |
|
#
¿
Feb 28, 2017 19:55
|
|
|
ufarn posted:I have an i5-760//Asus - P7P55D-E Deluxe, and because I don't want to splurge on an Intel chipset and socket that may not be futureproof, I want to see what I can do with overclocking. Another alternative is getting a Xeon CPU, but I haven't seen benchmarks that makes it stand too much apart from my current one. And if I have to go through the same overclocking hoops, I might as well give it a shot with this one. Not that I'd mind paying $79 to boost performance significantly if that's an option. You are correct that BCLK * Multiplier = core frequency, and there's the additional wrinkle that BCLK* RAM multiplier = RAM frequency and BCLK * QPI multiplier = QPI frequency. I haven't worked with any ASUS P55 boards, just an Intel DP55WG and a Gigabyte X58 board which is a pretty similar platform to overclock, but it looks like your Vtt is what other systems might call the Uncore voltage. You need to increase this if the memory controller or QPI can't keep up, but the former shouldn't be an issue - your RAM's speed will limit you before the controller more than likely. However the QPI speed will increase in lockstep with the core unless you can lower its multiplier (I didn't have the option, except for "slow mode" which is ruinously bad) and you may need to bump Vtt to keep it stable especially as you pass 166+ BCLK and head towards 180-200. The second link you gave in particular is a pretty good guide and the voltages it gives are safe in my opinion - 1.4V for CPU/Vcore and Uncore/Vtt. Here is what I did: 1. Find roughly the fastest core speed stable at stock voltages. Adjust RAM multiplier to keep the frequency within spec and minimize instability; you can optimize the RAM later. Feel free to just set it all the way down so you don't have to think about it until you're done with the core, if you prefer. Do the same with QPI if you can - but not "slow mode". 2. Begin to step up gradually, maybe 5-10 to BCLK at a time, and if it's not stable first try boosting Vcore a bit and then Vtt separately - you'll get an idea which is your limiting factor as you go. While feeling out the curve like this I don't usually do intensive stability testing, just boot and run something for 5 minutes to make sure it doesn't bluescreen. Continue to keep RAM speed in check by lowering the multiplier as you go. 3. Once you get to whatever voltage you consider your limit, you'll have an idea what the curve looks like and what speed you want to try to keep - if you can get 3.8GHz at 1.25V and it takes 1.4V to get to 4.0, you may decide that you'd rather have the lower speed to keep it cool and quiet for example. 4. At this point you can figure out if your RAM is stable at a higher multiplier if you wish. I personally don't mess with DRAM voltage much - I'm sure a little bit is OK just like anything else, but getting faster RAM usually seems like a better option. 5. Make sure you do at least one lengthy stability test with whatever you end up on, of course. By doing this I was able to get an i3-550 (3.20/24x) up to around a BCLK of 180 if I remember correctly, so ~4.4GHz, without exceeding 1.4V. I then replaced the i3 with a Xeon X3440 (2.53GHz/19x with turbo to 21x/20x on one/all cores) and was able to get that to about 185/~3.8GHz + turbo, but even disabling turbo wouldn't allow me to push higher than 190 so that may have been the limit of the motherboard. It's probably quite possible to get your i5-760 to a similar range, anyway. e: It's also possible to just approach it in reverse - start at whatever Vcore/Vtt you think is the max you'd be comfortable with, figure out what CPU clock speed you can make stable at that while spiking RAM multiplier so that it's a nonfactor, and then tune the RAM and voltages further from there if you want. It might be a faster approach if you just want to get as fast as you safely can and don't care what the curve in between looks like. Eletriarnation fucked around with this message at 17:53 on Jun 20, 2017 |
|
#
¿
Jun 20, 2017 15:50
|
|
|
ufarn posted:I think I might get down to overclocking somewhere in the weekend, because I think I've got it sorted out just about. This all sounds good to me. I am not sure if you'll be able to get enough real benefit from overvolting your RAM to be worth the risk of going very high. How much RAM do you have, and of what speed?
|
|
#
¿
Jun 23, 2017 06:05
|
|
|
Whoops, didn't realize that's what it was - my mistake. Yeah, 2x8GB DDR3-1600 is not a bad place to be even if you leave it at stock - a lot of systems from that generation would use 1333. You may realize, but to be clear the 0.5V is a maximum so you definitely don't need to keep it that far away - e.g. if your Vtt is up to 1.4V, please don't set the RAM from the stock 1.5 up to 1.9. This warning is mostly for older DDR3 which used 1.65 - you shouldn't use this stuff with the newer generations of DDR3 processors because if your Vtt is way down around 1.0 the large voltage gap can damage the memory controller. With boards I have worked with, RAM frequency is a product of BCLK and a separate, shown multiplier which you can also set - usually it starts at 6x or 8x and goes up in 2x (because it's DDR) steps. I don't think there's a way to set the RAM frequency in a more granular way due to the need for synchronization with BCLK. Your 1600MHz sticks would be 133x12 at stock, so if you set them down to 8x then you can go all the way up to a BCLK of 200 before you have to overclock the RAM just to keep going. Keep in mind that you may have to change latency too, depending on what your motherboard set as defaults once you set RAM timing to manual mode. It's been easiest for me to just take a picture with my phone of the SPD values in hwinfo or CPU-Z or whatever when the system is booted, and then I have a handy reference for what values are in spec while I'm looking at BIOS.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 23, 2017 16:50
|
|
|
My bet is that Auto for the RAM frequency setting is picking the highest SPD bin the motherboard supports, which I assume for your RAM is 1600MHz. Apparently they didn't feel like they needed to include a way to hard-set a bin higher than 1333MHz, at least in that UI mode. Often they'll hide more detailed settings like the multiplier unless you change some stuff from 'Auto' to 'Manual' like maybe CPU Level Up or Ai Overclock Tuner in what I see there - whatever gives you access to BCLK. I would bet that with that change, the RAM speed setting will also change to a multiplier instead of a frequency. If the interface is poorly designed it might continue to say '1333MHz' etc. but really mean "...at base BCLK", so x10. If there is still an "Auto" option at that point it will probably just scale up that highest SPD bin's clocks until it doesn't work anymore, if I had to guess. Hopefully it'll give you a multiplier since that will be simplest. I don't think that it's possible for the motherboard to hold the RAM at a given frequency while the BCLK moves around in any case, RAM and CPU frequency both have to be an integer multiple of that speed. Eletriarnation fucked around with this message at 21:00 on Jun 24, 2017 |
|
#
¿
Jun 24, 2017 20:57
|
|
|
ufarn posted:e: It's now stable at 170, but I'm not sure how to turn back up DRAM and QPI. Here are the current BIOS settings and their original frequency pre-OC: Your RAM was running at 1333 before - it says 661 in the CPU-Z screenshot, but that's the clock rate so for DDR the data rate would be 1322. It's not 1333 exactly because your BCLK dipped from 133MHz to ~132 while you were looking at it, which is fine. Your QPI is going to be very overclocked no matter what you do because you don't get enough multiplier options to go down much, but it should be fine to just stick with the lower setting from what I know. I've never heard anyone say that overclocking the QPI has a noticeable effect on system performance, but I don't know that I've ever seen much other discussion on it either. If you were able to get higher BCLK levels stable by lowering your CPU multiplier, then I think QPI must have also been higher which suggests that you still have some headroom where you are at 170. Eletriarnation fucked around with this message at 05:32 on Jul 16, 2017 |
|
#
¿
Jul 16, 2017 05:28
|
|
|
Lockback posted:FYI, my old super-star 2500k was rock solid at 4.4GHZ and needed TLC to get 4.5 and above. I think you can probably get to 4.2-4.4 stable, 4.5 is one of those barrier points on that CPU. Yeah - mine has been rock solid at 4.4 and 1.38V for 6 years, but every time I've tried to go to 4.5 I've seen instability pretty quickly. I could probably get there fine with a bit more voltage but I haven't felt motivated to push it.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 12, 2018 18:22
|
|
|
It seems likely that the real problem in that situation is probably the Hyper 212; I use one on my 2500K as well and it's great (maxes out around 70C) , but I'm only running at 4.4GHz and I assume pumping out a lot fewer watts as a result. It's probably not going to be able to keep up with a really serious overclock that puts out more than ~130W (30-35W for a 6mm heatpipe, x4) and you'll want either a a larger air cooler with more/larger heatpipes or a large AIO instead.
Eletriarnation fucked around with this message at 22:41 on Mar 27, 2018 |
|
#
¿
Mar 27, 2018 22:30
|
|
|
Craptacular! posted:I'd be surprised if the difference between Kryonaut and AS5 is actually meaningful, and the need to use AS5 instead of whatever paste shipped with your purchase evaporates a little more each year. It was several years ago but HardOCP did a test and determined that American cheese was only about 6C worse under load than their best thermal grease, so I'd be willing to wager that the vast majority of thermal greases are going to perform similarly.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 28, 2018 14:47
|
|
|
If anyone has an X58 system still lying around functional and hasn't tried a Westmere-EP Xeon yet to see if it will work, I would highly recommend it as a fun little project now that LGA1366 processors of all varieties are so cheap. I have a Gigabyte EX58-DS4 that I originally got back in November 2008 with an i7-920 and while I was able to get it to up around 3.8GHz with no trouble originally, 4.0 was tricky to get stable and beyond didn't seem feasible. After I built another system around a 2500K which could hit 4.4 nearly without trying, overclocking on the i7-920 seemed like more of a curiosity than a useful enterprise so I mostly forgot about it for a while. Recently after tinkering with underclocking a Nehalem-EP L5520 to use as a home server, I got curious about my options for upgrading to a hexcore. According to Gigabyte's website, the board only supports Gulftown hexcores and they're still relatively expensive but there are some Westmere-EP quads that work like the E5603. Since the board supports 130W models of Nehalem I knew power delivery should be adequate and it really didn't make much sense that microcode would be present for only some of the Westmere-EP generation, so I decided to buy the cheapest model of hexcore I could just to see and got an L5640. Surprisingly it worked without a hitch and like the L5520, responds very well to undervolting - you can run all day long at 2GHz under 30W. Unfortunately without an unlocked multiplier, I could only take a low-ratio chip like the L5640 so high before hitting a wall. With the knowledge that it worked though, I went back to eBay and got an X5660. The X5660 is going much, much farther than I ever expected to be able to take it:  Considering that the top-model X5690 hits 3.73 under max turbo and I'm only using a Hyper 212 to keep this cool right now (which is why HT is disabled, it's still pushing 175W and close to 90C), I'm wondering if I somehow got a golden chip or if Westmere is the golden generation that never was because they all got released as clock-locked Xeons. I don't think I've had an overclock this good since 12 years ago when I took a Pentium M 1.6 to 2.56 and that at least made a bit more sense being a mobile chip running with desktop cooling. Eletriarnation fucked around with this message at 21:59 on May 6, 2018 |
|
#
¿
May 6, 2018 20:05
|
|
|
Looking at this I'm wondering why Intel wasn't selling a 4GHz Westmere as the i7-1990X or whatever - I mean, this chip came out in Q1 '10 a full year before Sandy Bridge and almost two before Sandy Bridge E. Even the 3960X was also a 6-core running at only 3.9 stock and it was over a grand at release. I guess it probably just comes down to a lack of demand - four cores still seemed like a lot at that point. Eletriarnation fucked around with this message at 20:54 on May 6, 2018 |
|
#
¿
May 6, 2018 20:51
|
|
|
Yeah, it helps that the system I'm coming from is only a generation newer; the only feature that I really care about losing from my Z68 motherboard is USB 3.0 and that's from an ASMedia chip instead of the chipset anyway so I'll just add it back in with a card. I was already limited to PCIe 2.0 which I doubt makes much difference gaming on a 1060 and while I'll have to run RAM at 1600MHz instead of 2133 I expect triple channel to compensate for that.JnnyThndrs posted:You done good. I have an EX58-DS3 with an X5670 in it & Hyper 212, and I can only get an all-core 3.8ghz out of it if I want 100% stability. I think I only have $200 into it(I already had the memory) and it makes a helluva Hackintosh. I actually used this one as a Hackintosh for a while too before deciding that I didn't actually have a purpose for a Mac at home. RAM cost vs. a new DDR4 system is a huge appeal for me, since a while back I was able to get 6x4GB of 2012 Mac Pro RAM for ~$100 off eBay. It has like 10 valid SPD timings all at 1.5V from 666MHz 5-5-5-12 up to 1866MHz 13-13-13-32 which is a great help when doing BCLK overclocking, it doesn't have crazy huge heatspreaders that get in the way of my CPU fans, and it's even ECC which doesn't matter for this system but is nice for the batch that I'm using in a C226-chipset home server. Eletriarnation fucked around with this message at 22:06 on May 6, 2018 |
|
#
¿
May 6, 2018 21:34
|
|
|
Dadbod Apocalypse posted:Woah! I've got an i7-740 and an X-58. You're telling me I can drop a x5660 in there without swapping out anything else?! Maybe, it depends totally on the motherboard and BIOS revision - also I assume you mean i7-940, as 740 would be P55/LGA1156. You can look into how to dump microcode from a BIOS and read its contents, then compare the IDs you get to the one for Westmere for an added measure of confidence. I was actually able to boot the L5640 but not the X5660 with my first attempt using the F11 version which was the final full release for my board - I still don't really get that but the final F12o version which is still marked as a beta works fine for both.
|
|
#
¿
May 8, 2018 00:34
|
|
|
Not really because any 1366 quad is virtually worthless at this point - good hexcores are worth a little but all the value is in the mobo. You can pay for it if you want to tinker but I can't pretend it's a superior approach for getting a hexcore vs a new Ryzen system - it might be cheaper, but with as much age as all X58 boards have you're definitely taking a chance. e: for anyone who has 1156, get an X3440 if you can OC because it's the cheapest model with HT. I use one of those in my work desktop with a 25% OC, works great. Seemed to be OK up to around 4.0 but for a work machine I didn't care about pushing it to the edge. Eletriarnation fucked around with this message at 03:05 on May 8, 2018 |
|
#
¿
May 8, 2018 02:49
|
|
|
Oh, if you have EVGA you're almost certainly good - you should check for yourself to be sure but from what I recall they actually advertise Westmere support for their X58 boards instead of (maybe) shoving in the microcode and saying nothing about it like the other consumer board OEMs.Palladium posted:That what's I'm talking about, but I also like holding a piece of computing history. Yeah, in my case I found a decommissioned server in the junk bin at my work that was using an Intel P55 board with an i3-530. Actually I was able to get the i3 up to around 4.4 so it would have been an upgrade over the i3-5010U NUC that I was using regardless, but much more so with a quad running at ~3.5 instead. At this point buying an X58 system intending to overclock Westmere is not really that compelling just for games in my opinion, because if like people are saying a more typical OC is around 3.8-4.0 then you're going to end up with something that has lower IPC and clocks than a Ryzen 5 2600X and uses twice the power. Obviously an 8700K is going to be better in every way too. The main reason it excited me was that I'm coming from Sandy Bridge and already have the X58 system, so if my guess that IPC is similar holds then with a crazy 4.6 chip I basically get to double my L3 cache and add two cores for the cost of the NH-D14 I'm buying to keep it cool at that speed. But as was mentioned earlier, the one big edge that remains is the cost of DDR3 vs. DDR4; especially if you're going past 16GB and if you already have ancillary parts like storage/PSU/case, your up-front cost will be much higher with a new system. For that reason I think the platform still has some appeal for building a powerful but relatively cheap workstation - you can find Supermicro boards including dual-socket models for pretty cheap at this point and 6/12/18x16GB registered ECC DDR3 isn't that bad either if you're willing to buy used. Nothing to do with overclocking at that point though, unless Supermicro's server boards are really wandering off the beaten path in their feature set. Eletriarnation fucked around with this message at 17:01 on May 8, 2018 |
|
#
¿
May 8, 2018 05:53
|
|
|
Definitely, I doubt registered RAM would work in an X58 board actually - you'd need one of the server boards for that. You can use ECC if you want, it just won't run in ECC mode unless you have a Xeon and the motherboard has traces/BIOS support for it. My Gigabyte board doesn't.
|
|
#
¿
May 8, 2018 06:02
|
|
|
You might be surprised by what it could do, especially the Opteron. My old Pentium M system with 4GB of DDR1 was actually able to run Skyrim and WoW in Windows 10 on an AGP HD4570, although performance was of course pretty terrible even at 720p/low.
|
|
#
¿
May 8, 2018 18:48
|
|
|
What's the model of your board and is the BIOS up to date?
|
|
#
¿
May 12, 2018 05:08
|
|
|
Dadbod Apocalypse posted:It's an EVGA 132-bl-e758 sli
|
|
#
¿
May 13, 2018 13:24
|
|
|
That's super odd. I'm making this post from an EX58-DS4, which I think is virtually the same motherboard, with an X5660 running at BCLK 190 and HT enabled. If you decrease your RAM multiplier such that it's underclocked even when you step up BCLK, does it boot? What about CPU multiplier? Are RAM timings and all voltages on default?
|
|
#
¿
Jun 20, 2018 04:10
|
|
|
Excellent! My understanding is that X58 is the first generation where the memory controller can operate in mixed mode, using triple- or dual-channel where possible for the first bank and single-channel for the remainder. I'm not sure how many problems this has in practice, I never tried it. Previous generations were much more limited; even X48 allows you to get dual-channel only if the DIMMs in both channels add up to the same capacity. It's odd that the latest BIOS effectively wouldn't allow any overclocking, especially since it's not labeled as a beta. The DS4's final version or two were labeled beta and came with warnings, but I had to load the final one to get my X5660 working and haven't noticed any issues with it. It's interesting that your screenshot shows 21x as the max multiplier. Do you have turbo enabled? I think 21x might be the base multiplier; I'm able to hit 23x with all cores loaded and 24x with 1, using default settings. I couldn't actually find a way to remove the 1-core step without disabling turbo entirely and going down to 21x, but my BCLK wouldn't go high enough to get to 4.6GHz that way. I could get Windows to boot at 200 BCLK just fine and all the multi-core stress tests I ran seemed OK, but when I started running games I had cores popping up to 4.8 and giving me weird crashes. I had to turn down BCLK to 190 to get it really stable. Also, what does your motherboard set Vcore to at that speed? I have 1.375 set in BIOS and 1.36 showing in HWinfo. I'm keeping it reasonably cool and it seems like I should be safe, Sandy Bridge was on the same process and I ran a 2500K at 1.39 for years.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 21, 2018 05:11
|
|
|
Mr E posted:Now that I have a stable overclock with manual voltage (and speedstep), does it hurt the life of the processor at all to keep it manual, or do I absolutely need to start getting an offset set up? I assume the CPU will take the voltage it needs no matter what's being supplied from the mobo? It would be more accurate to say that the CPU will take whatever voltage the mobo gives it and will brown out if that's too low or die if it's too high. To a certain degree it pulls whatever current it needs, but since current is a function of voltage even that can be tuned down by undervolting as long as you don't go too low and brownout. I don't know exactly how offsets work for you but if they allow the CPU to downvolt when it's not at max turbo then that's mostly a power savings feature. I think with CPUs depending on whether you're using LLC the voltage at idle may be higher than it is at load, but the thing to keep in mind is that long-term wear from electromigration will come from a combination of high temperature and high voltage. Without the temperatures that come from being under load, your wear from idling will be comparatively minimal.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 27, 2018 00:43
|
|
|
I have the P8Z68-V LX, which is basically the cheap ATX previous-gen version of that board, and from what I recall all I did to get my 2500K to 4.4GHz was set the all-core multiplier to 44x and the voltage offset to something like +0.11V (1.38V absolute).
|
|
#
¿
Oct 4, 2018 06:17
|
|
|
cat doter posted:I've had a hyper 212 evo for years now, I slapped a second fan on the heatsink and I get about 80c when all 8 threads of my i7 3770k are at 100%, but I think that's mostly a limitation of the crappy TIM at this point, delidded temps would probably be 20-25c lower. It's telling that it'll jump up 20c within a second and drop back down 20c a second later, like the heat from the die just isn't being transferred enough to dissipate it over time. That's at 4.5ghz at 1.3v. Yeah, that sounds like partly a TIM issue. My 2500K at 4.4GHz/1.39V never went over 70C with a 212+ using only the stock fan. Don Lapre posted:Only reason to buy a 212 is if you need 20xx support or the cryorig h7 is out of stock. Well, they go on sale for $20 a lot and it's not actually that hard to put on if you have the mobo flat and have done it before; I've bought like six of them with uniformly great results. The system I'm typing this on right now has dual X5670s with 212s and even with Prime95 going on all cores I'm looking at 50-55C, so it's not bad unless you start trying to exceed around the 120-130W it was designed for. It isn't actually good at this point either though, so I'd only buy another if it was on sale and I had a similar <=100W locked clock situation. Might as well shoot a bit higher if performance could actually be affected.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 15, 2018 16:49
|
|
|
n.. posted:i know i know, gooncensus is that gigabyte is a garbage fire I know this is hyperbole, but honestly the only concrete and substantiated criticism I can remember hearing of Gigabyte on this forum is that they downgraded components after rev. 1 on a few old budget boards. My main desktop has a ten year old Gigabyte board still chugging along happily with a 45% overclock on a processor it never claimed to even support and no issues whatsoever, and while that's not necessarily exceptional (what with the 15 year old ASUS board I have that still works too) I'd tell anyone asking to consider Gigabyte boards alongside other top tier manufacturers' on their apparent merits. Eletriarnation fucked around with this message at 23:02 on Oct 23, 2018 |
|
#
¿
Oct 23, 2018 22:58
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ Apr 26, 2024 16:16 |
|
|
Personally, I'd get rid of as many "Auto" settings as possible - stuff like DRAM speed, Uncore speed, stuff like that. Usually "Auto" means "stock" and that's fine, but some BIOSes get creative and start changing what it means when you start enabling overclocking and they break poo poo. Manually set as much of that to stock numbers as possible to make sure that you're starting where you think you are. Once you think everything is set to stock, make sure that boots and go from there in changing just one thing at a time.
Eletriarnation fucked around with this message at 22:52 on Mar 20, 2019 |
|
#
¿
Mar 20, 2019 22:49
|
|