Welcome Guest ( Log In | Register )

Bump Topic Topic Closed RSS Feed

Outline · [ Standard ] · Linear+

 My Wolfie E8400 Retail

views
     
TSLodewijk
post Feb 15 2008, 01:19 PM, updated 18y ago

Getting Started
**
Junior Member
85 posts

Joined: Dec 2006
Specs :
Processor E8400 FPO/Batch Q746A474, Packing Date : 01/07/2008
MB Gigabyte GA-X48-DQ6 F6i BIOS
VGA Winfast GeForce 8800GTS 512 MB
Memory Team Xtreem DDR2-800 CL3 2 GB Kit
PSU Gigabyte ODIN Pro 1200 Watt
Cooled by Thermalright Ultra Xtreme 120 + Thermaltake 12 cm Fan

Remember, this is all on air cooling biggrin.gif

Dual Prime @ 4.2 GHz 1.424 volt real 1.44 in BIOS

user posted image


Dual PI 32M @ 4.5 GHz 1.504v real 1.520v in BIOS

user posted image


3DMark 2006 @ 4.5 GHz

user posted image


Super PI 8M @ 4.6 GHz 1.545v real 1.568v in BIOS

user posted image


Suicide Shot @ 4.77 GHz @ 1.58 volt

user posted image

http://valid.x86-secret.com/show_oc.php?id=313301
cstkl1
post Feb 15 2008, 01:25 PM

Look at all my stars!!
Group Icon
Elite
6,799 posts

Joined: Jan 2003

hmm a lot of vcore leh..

and stability on ram only??
proc leh??

got two ppl with the same batch..


This post has been edited by cstkl1: Feb 15 2008, 01:29 PM
TSLodewijk
post Feb 15 2008, 01:32 PM

Getting Started
**
Junior Member
85 posts

Joined: Dec 2006
Can you see my SS with Orthos ??? that's CPU stability my friend
Ezonizs
post Feb 15 2008, 01:32 PM

~*~Freak~*~
******
Senior Member
1,055 posts

Joined: Sep 2007
From: Subang Jaya



lol same batch + same pack date smore laugh.gif
cstkl1
post Feb 15 2008, 01:39 PM

Look at all my stars!!
Group Icon
Elite
6,799 posts

Joined: Jan 2003

QUOTE(Lodewijk @ Feb 15 2008, 01:32 PM)
Can you see my SS with Orthos ??? that's CPU stability my friend
*
SS=System Stability??

QUOTE
The "In-place large FFTs" test uses relatively large FFTs which cannot fit into the CPU cache so this test accesses main memory a lot. It only accesses a relatively small amount of main memory because it runs the FFTs in-place so it accesses the same RAM over and over.


but oklarr seems ure nb is stable which is actually the challenge for e8400. not really the vcore..

but definitely ure proc is way too much vcore me thinks base on the result of the same batch.

This post has been edited by cstkl1: Feb 15 2008, 01:41 PM
OC4/3
post Feb 15 2008, 01:42 PM

.
Group Icon
Elite
4,746 posts

Joined: Dec 2007
From: Speed rule


The vcore for 4.2 is rather high,should go 4.4 like that on this batch and the vcore.
cstkl1
post Feb 15 2008, 01:45 PM

Look at all my stars!!
Group Icon
Elite
6,799 posts

Joined: Jan 2003

hmm different vid??
TSLodewijk
post Feb 15 2008, 01:47 PM

Getting Started
**
Junior Member
85 posts

Joined: Dec 2006
QUOTE(OC4/3 @ Feb 15 2008, 12:42 PM)
The vcore for 4.2 is rather high,should go 4.4 like that on this batch and the vcore.
*
hmm maybe different mobo... will try again with Mars biggrin.gif
cstkl1
post Feb 15 2008, 01:49 PM

Look at all my stars!!
Group Icon
Elite
6,799 posts

Joined: Jan 2003

QUOTE(Lodewijk @ Feb 15 2008, 01:47 PM)
hmm maybe different mobo... will try again with Mars biggrin.gif
*
yeah cause i have that batch.. friends one
and ezoinics also has it..

my bet.. ure gtl is way off.. hence ure force clocking the vcore.

sHawTY
post Feb 15 2008, 03:44 PM

Frequent Reporter
********
All Stars
14,908 posts

Joined: Jul 2005

Nice results TS.
But it seems like the vcore is a lil bit on the high side right? hmm.gif

This post has been edited by sHawTY: Feb 15 2008, 03:45 PM
goldfries
post Feb 15 2008, 03:59 PM

40K Club
Group Icon
Forum Admin
44,415 posts

Joined: Jan 2003




ok guys. behave yourself. cleaning up thread now.
cstkl1
post Feb 15 2008, 05:23 PM

Look at all my stars!!
Group Icon
Elite
6,799 posts

Joined: Jan 2003

QUOTE(sHawTY @ Feb 15 2008, 03:44 PM)
Nice results TS.
But it seems like the vcore is a lil bit on the high side right? hmm.gif
*
thats cause i suspect his gtl is high.. so via brute force...

found that sometimes brute force more stable though..

hm ts noticed something about ure results.. interesting.. so thats how u guys do it..
will try in a minute..
nice proc score.. on 3dmark..way higher than me maximus by 20 points..
wonder was it the rams or tweaking..


This post has been edited by cstkl1: Feb 15 2008, 05:29 PM
clawhammer
post Feb 15 2008, 07:37 PM

///M
Group Icon
VIP
8,788 posts

Joined: Jan 2003
From: Kuala Lumpur




Nice E8400 and looks like most people should be happy doing 4.2Ghz stable for daily run.

Btw, I see E8500 on pricelists already biggrin.gif
Ezonizs
post Feb 15 2008, 08:40 PM

~*~Freak~*~
******
Senior Member
1,055 posts

Joined: Sep 2007
From: Subang Jaya



QUOTE(clawhammer @ Feb 15 2008, 08:37 PM)
Nice E8400 and looks like most people should be happy doing 4.2Ghz stable for daily run.

Btw, I see E8500 on pricelists already biggrin.gif
*
almost Rm1k to get extra 0.16Ghz and 0.5 multiplier sad.gif
gengstapo
post Feb 15 2008, 09:02 PM

Retired enthusiast
********
All Stars
10,688 posts

Joined: Jan 2005
1.42V aint that high i think
its still acceptable & with decent(no need those really hi-performance) HSf, temp should be just fine smile.gif

ps: wolfie really make me itchy.. sad.gif
cstkl1
post Feb 15 2008, 09:23 PM

Look at all my stars!!
Group Icon
Elite
6,799 posts

Joined: Jan 2003

QUOTE(gengstapo @ Feb 15 2008, 09:02 PM)
1.42V aint that high i think
its still acceptable & with decent(no need those really hi-performance) HSf, temp should be just fine smile.gif

ps: wolfie really make me itchy.. sad.gif
*
1.42v for that batch at 4.2 is high bro..
caus u need only 1.368v for 4.25


clawhammer
post Feb 15 2008, 09:27 PM

///M
Group Icon
VIP
8,788 posts

Joined: Jan 2003
From: Kuala Lumpur




QUOTE(gengstapo @ Feb 15 2008, 09:02 PM)
1.42V aint that high i think
its still acceptable & with decent(no need those really hi-performance) HSf, temp should be just fine smile.gif

ps: wolfie really make me itchy.. sad.gif
*
Yes, 1.42V is decent and is what reported by many other users as well (around that voltage range) smile.gif
We should go by facts, not the assumption of Super PI completion = stability right? rolleyes.gif

This post has been edited by clawhammer: Feb 15 2008, 09:27 PM
gengstapo
post Feb 15 2008, 09:27 PM

Retired enthusiast
********
All Stars
10,688 posts

Joined: Jan 2005
^ ahh ic icc
didnt know coz never have wolfie.. will be hoping to get near future, but mostly OEM or ES version.. wanna get cheaper 1 as i prefer quaddy more tongue.gif
cstkl1
post Feb 15 2008, 09:44 PM

Look at all my stars!!
Group Icon
Elite
6,799 posts

Joined: Jan 2003

QUOTE(clawhammer @ Feb 15 2008, 09:27 PM)
Yes, 1.42V is decent and is what reported by many other users as well (around that voltage range) smile.gif
We should go by facts, not the assumption of Super PI completion = stability right? rolleyes.gif
*
thats ive been telling u..
their bus termination voltage is way off

heck i can even demo for u but whats the point...in the end will be targeted as bragging etc.. sishh..

that webby edgeofstability.com is really good
or u can try this.. it was done by XS legend awhile back on the 975bx
for c2d no point.. but for quaddies and wolfdale there is..


first few ideas of gtl by FCG
http://www.thetechrepository.com/showthread.php?t=94

and to understand VTT..

http://www.thetechrepository.com/showthread.php?t=94

wth is FSB termination voltage aka vtt aka HT-Link voltage
answer

QUOTE
source -> line -> component -> short line -> termination

the "lines" in this case are signal traces. works a lot like a SCSI bus. high speed switching operations can cause reflections on the line (in essence, this is resonant noise caused from high-speed switching on the lines as the memory controller gates on and off to place data on the bus, nothing more than rising and falling voltages). clearly enough, the faster the signal switches (higher frequency memory) the more noise.

termination resistors, used in passive termination environments, are exactly matched to the target frequency for operation based largely on trace length, ESR (equivalent series resistance) and the over capactive/inductive nature of the circuit, as well as some other things well out of the scope of this post. problem is that this is often matched for a specific frequency...which as we know is not so cool for overclockers. enter the active termination system. this actually uses a voltage bias to set final line resistance value so that the user can tune for better operation when overclocking.

this method of tuning is largely trial and error as you have no way of know the specification of the circuit or have any idea of the calculations need to find the "perfect" value. so anway, the answer is, strangely enough, whatever works best.

hope this helps.

FCG

http://www.xtremesystems.org/forums/showpo...741&postcount=7

PS.. for some.. just because they cant achieve it they assume the rest cannot..and worst still they take the multitude as a reference which makes things worst..and worst still after u convince them.. the idiot will think its because of the batch or vid..DA

This post has been edited by cstkl1: Feb 15 2008, 09:58 PM
wodenus
post Feb 15 2008, 10:15 PM

Tree Octopus
********
All Stars
14,990 posts

Joined: Jan 2003
Hm.. that's only one hour. I've seen OCs that ran fine over one hour but failed at 8 hours. I think if you really want to say "stable" you should run that thing for 8 hours. What I do is I run orthos and ATITool's find artifact. Then I stop the cube from spinning. That seems to really raise the temperature for some reason.


2 Pages  1 2 >Top
Topic ClosedOptions
 

Change to:
| Lo-Fi Version
0.0192sec    0.47    5 queries    GZIP Disabled
Time is now: 2nd December 2025 - 09:34 PM