geekhack

geekhack Community => Other Geeky Stuff => Topic started by: chimera15 on Mon, 04 October 2010, 05:13:05

Title: Overclocking
Post by: chimera15 on Mon, 04 October 2010, 05:13:05

I suppose I should reread some of the stuff on overclockers.net or elsewhere, but I thought I'd try to get some more specific help to my system since I know there are a lot of overclockers here.

So I just built my first 1366 system.  This is the first system I've had that I really built to try to overclock.  It's a 2.13 ghz base cpu.  It currently has a 133mhz  bclk frequency, a 100mhz pcie frequency.  It has an unlocked cpu ratio, but is currently on the highest setting of 16 for 133x16=2.13.  

If I wanted to run my system at 2.4 ghz, should I just increase the bclk fequency, or should I lower the cpu ratio to 12, and set the bclk to 200?

I've never had an unlocked multiplier chip before that I intended to look at for overclocking, so this is a bit new to me.  In c2d era all you could do really is increase the fsb which is the same as the blck a bit at a time right?

If it let me I could increase the multiplier to 18, and I could 2.4 that way right?  That would leave everything else as it is on the board, and just stress the processor.  If i increase the bclk it'll stress the entire system/board?  

 But it doesn't seem to be in the available settings, only lower numbers.....

Also my memory only seems to be showing up as 800mhz, even though it's at least 1333mhz memory...so I don't quite get that.  I don't see a setting to change that at all...but maybe just haven't explored enough yet.

Title: Overclocking
Post by: chimera15 on Mon, 04 October 2010, 05:40:40

Alright, going with this then.  It seems to suggest setting the multiplier to 12 and bclk to 200 is what I need to do.

Title: Overclocking
Post by: chimera15 on Mon, 04 October 2010, 05:55:04

Well that didn't work.  Tried a setting of 12 and 200 right off and it won't boot.  Oops.

Title: Overclocking
Post by: chimera15 on Mon, 04 October 2010, 06:02:47

Phew! Look like it reset itself after 3 times failing to boot.

Title: Overclocking
Post by: Scarzy on Mon, 04 October 2010, 06:23:29

It always reverts back to original settings so don't be worried about checking things out. You need to read up on changing volts probably to get more out of your CPU. It was quite easy with mine, my E2160 (1.8ghz at stock) is on 2.69ghz stable nearly all the time. Let us know how it goes!

Title: Overclocking
Post by: Rajagra on Mon, 04 October 2010, 08:50:40

I've always found overclocking to be unrewarding, even when it worked. The extra speed will never recover the time you spent working to get it! :smile: I see it as something to be done for fun rather than getting performance on the cheap.

Having said that, my i7 system was designed for overclocking so I should give it a try.

Title: Overclocking
Post by: Phaedrus2129 on Mon, 04 October 2010, 09:03:41

Just a note, DO NOT touch the PCIe frequency. Depending on your motherboard and drives, somewhere between 101MHz and 120MHz it'll start frying your hard drives, because your southbridge is run off the PCIe clock, and your hard drives' circuitry is run off the southbridge. It gives no performance boost at all since PCIe 2.0 X16's bandwidth is more than enough for even a Radeon 5970.

I haven't had a chance to overclock an LGA1366 system yet, so I can't help with that. Have you tried actually asking at OCN?

Title: Overclocking
Post by: chimera15 on Tue, 05 October 2010, 03:40:28

Nope, not yet.  I kinda got scared after my first failure. lol  I have school to do now, so maybe after I get my homework done for this week in a few days or something.

On a side note I actually got this system to run the game I play, Warrock, to run perfectly on it, with no jerkiness, frame lag, or framerate slowdowns I was having on my other systems.  It wasn't by any overclocking, or because this system is a lot more powerful than my c2ds, but because I tested this system with putting in old junk 8600gt video cards in it.

I found that the game had 0 problems by running one old graphics card.  With a more powerful card the game actually has frame lag.  I can use the system right now with 8600gt's in sli config and it'll actually increase the frame lag.

I've since confirmed this by reading the warrock bulletin boards where others have reported that older graphics cards provide higher framerates, and actually measured it to be so.  

It's really counter intuitive, and even the game designers are clueless about the problem, as it's not 100% across the board for everyone, and they can't recreate the problem themselves.  If anyone has a clue as to that on this board, I'd appreciate it, cause I really am confused by it.  

People report a higher frame rate with a 128mb 5 year old, super low mhz card, than a 1 or 2gig brand new super gpu.

This is actually pretty interesting if it stays this way.  It's like for the first time a game might actually require you to downgrade to play it. roflol

Title: Overclocking
Post by: alec on Tue, 05 October 2010, 05:30:53

Nothing wrong with that if engine is very old and was optimized for GPUs of that time.
New GPUs are mostly about pixel shaders and memory size/bandwidth and Warrock usues neither.


When starting overclock I like first to know limits of each individual component.

In your case 12x200 failed probably because of memory or motherboard limit rather than CPU.
Start with 12x133 and raise bclk gradually until it won't work
Then lower memory divider and see if it works at those settings. That would mean memory was the limiter.

After I learn the limits I see how much can I gain by adding voltage. Usually the gain is not worth extra power and heat and noise.

And only then I decide at what setting can my system run optimaly.

Title: Overclocking
Post by: chimera15 on Tue, 05 October 2010, 06:06:31

Warrock is about 3-4 years old, but has been upgraded continuously. I understand why if that was the case it wouldn't be any better, but why would it be worse with a newer graphics card? That makes no sense at all.

I'll try 12x133 next then when I get the nerve up again. lol  That'll severely underclock it right?

Title: Overclocking
Post by: alec on Tue, 05 October 2010, 06:34:48

Quote from: Rajagra;229535

I've always found overclocking to be unrewarding, even when it worked. The extra speed will never recover the time you spent working to get it! :smile: I see it as something to be done for fun rather than getting performance on the cheap.

Can't say it wastes much time, but it does occupy the mind quite a bit.
Once set up I'm using this system for a year without change

But if I didn't waste couple days doing it, I'd be constantly thinking about underperforming, blaming every slowdown on this.

12x133 is guaranteed to be working just as 16x133 is. And if you raise bclk gradually, say 20MHz at a time you get more information than just "its not booting at 12x200".
Could run a simple cpu/memory test every time too. I used prime95 to find instability. Sometimes it would boot but give errors in prime95, then I know that memory is at the limit.

Title: Overclocking
Post by: lam47 on Tue, 05 October 2010, 07:15:26

I find a good starting point is to find the max for the CPU and Ram independently. You downclock one to find the top of the other.
My 955 will run 24hours at 3.8
The gains will depend very much on what you are doing.

My brothers PC I made him was all gain. Its a triple core unlocked into a quad! Its perfectly stable too.

For some games a CPU overclock will help FPS. Others it will do nothing and you will need to look at clocking the GPU up.
There is so much to go into its hard to write anything short that will be helpful.

Good luck with it all though.
I would say that Overclocking rewards for time effort a lot more than water cooling does!

Title: Overclocking
Post by: EverythingIBM on Tue, 05 October 2010, 09:02:01

Quote from: chimera15;229885

Warrock is about 3-4 years old, but has been upgraded continuously. I understand why if that was the case it wouldn't be any better, but why would it be worse with a newer graphics card? That makes no sense at all.

I'll try 12x133 next then when I get the nerve up again. lol  That'll severely underclock it right?

Sometimes older hardware just performs better for certain software. A quick example I can think of is the new computers hate changing MIDIs in games, so the CPU pauses, whereas in older computers this wasn't so.

So maybe your question is why didn't the programmers update the code to handle new graphics cards better? Laziness?

Title: Overclocking
Post by: zefrer on Tue, 05 October 2010, 09:11:23

Quote from: chimera15;229490

So I just built my first 1366 system.  This is the first system I've had that I really built to try to overclock.  It's a 2.13 ghz base cpu.  It currently has a 133mhz  bclk frequency, a 100mhz pcie frequency.  It has an unlocked cpu ratio, but is currently on the highest setting of 16 for 133x16=2.13.  

That is not an unlocked cpu ratio. It's like this, most CPUs Intel sells are "unlocked" ratio wise if you're going down but not up. Which means your 2.13Ghz CPU has a maximum ratio of 16 but can go down.

A truly unlocked ratio like you get on the 980X (and all extreme edition cpus) for example can go both up and down with no restrictions.

Quote from: chimera15;229490

If I wanted to run my system at 2.4 ghz, should I just increase the bclk fequency, or should I lower the cpu ratio to 12, and set the bclk to 200?

In your case, don't touch the ratio just increase BCLK. The reason being that lowering the ratio means you need a much higher BCLK to reach the same speed. However, you cannot increase BCLK indefinitely. For 4.0Ghz for example with a 12 ratio you'd need a 330 BCLK. If you find a motherboard that can do that let me know.. :)

Quote from: chimera15;229490

If it let me I could increase the multiplier to 18, and I could 2.4 that way right?  That would leave everything else as it is on the board, and just stress the processor.  If i increase the bclk it'll stress the entire system/board?  

 But it doesn't seem to be in the available settings, only lower numbers.....

Yes exactly. That's why it's not unlocked.

Quote from: chimera15;229490

Also my memory only seems to be showing up as 800mhz, even though it's at least 1333mhz memory...so I don't quite get that.  I don't see a setting to change that at all...but maybe just haven't explored enough yet.

You seem to be confusing bus speeds with memory speeds. What is your cpu and memory exactly?

Here's a few things to get you started.

1) Lock the PCIe and memory frequency. There should be a setting in your motherboard to lock the PCIe frequency to 100mhz (standard PCIe frequency, do _not_ increase). Likewise for memory. Start with your memory locked at it's default setting.

2) Increment BCLK slowly and test stability with something like super-pi or similar.

3) Once you find a frequency that is not stable in super-pi you have two options. Either accept that as a free overclock with no other adjustments needed or continue.. To continue means to increase cpu core voltage. As you go up in frequency the CPU needs more juice. More juice means more heat expelled however so at this point you need an aftermarket heatsink (which you should have anyway).

4) Continue 2 and 3 until you find a stable frequency at acceptable temperatures for you. Acceptable is anything lower than 70C. Keep in mind that the stock Intel heatsink is woefuly poor and will do 70C in _stock_ settings. Get a good heatsink.

Once that is done you now have your stable CPU overclock. You can do the same steps for your memory overclock.. Increase memory frequency in bios via the locking mechanism, don't touch BCLK after you've done your CPU. Once you find instability increase memory vdimm a little at a time and keep going.

Go slow with voltage increases, 0.1 at a time. Do not exceed ~0.5V total voltage increase unless you really know what you're doing if you ask me.

How much you can do with overclocking is mostly dependant on the motherboard these days. If you have a good motherboard it's super easy, some even have overclocking "wizards" that work suprisingly well.

If you don't have a good motherboard it is but an exercise in frustration. Get a better board.

Title: Overclocking
Post by: chimera15 on Tue, 05 October 2010, 10:38:00

Quote from: zefrer;229931

That is not an unlocked cpu ratio. It's like this, most CPUs Intel sells are "unlocked" ratio wise if you're going down but not up. Which means your 2.13Ghz CPU has a maximum ratio of 16 but can go down.

A truly unlocked ratio like you get on the 980X (and all extreme edition cpus) for example can go both up and down with no restrictions.



In your case, don't touch the ratio just increase BCLK. The reason being that lowering the ratio means you need a much higher BCLK to reach the same speed. However, you cannot increase BCLK indefinitely. For 4.0Ghz for example with a 12 ratio you'd need a 330 BCLK. If you find a motherboard that can do that let me know.. :)



Yes exactly. That's why it's not unlocked.




You seem to be confusing bus speeds with memory speeds. What is your cpu and memory exactly?

Here's a few things to get you started.

1) Lock the PCIe and memory frequency. There should be a setting in your motherboard to lock the PCIe frequency to 100mhz (standard PCIe frequency, do _not_ increase). Likewise for memory. Start with your memory locked at it's default setting.

2) Increment BCLK slowly and test stability with something like super-pi or similar.

3) Once you find a frequency that is not stable in super-pi you have two options. Either accept that as a free overclock with no other adjustments needed or continue.. To continue means to increase cpu core voltage. As you go up in frequency the CPU needs more juice. More juice means more heat expelled however so at this point you need an aftermarket heatsink (which you should have anyway).

4) Continue 2 and 3 until you find a stable frequency at acceptable temperatures for you. Acceptable is anything lower than 70C. Keep in mind that the stock Intel heatsink is woefuly poor and will do 70C in _stock_ settings. Get a good heatsink.

Once that is done you now have your stable CPU overclock. You can do the same steps for your memory overclock.. Increase memory frequency in bios via the locking mechanism, don't touch BCLK after you've done your CPU. Once you find instability increase memory vdimm a little at a time and keep going.

Go slow with voltage increases, 0.1 at a time. Do not exceed ~0.5V total voltage increase unless you really know what you're doing if you ask me.

How much you can do with overclocking is mostly dependant on the motherboard these days. If you have a good motherboard it's super easy, some even have overclocking "wizards" that work suprisingly well.

If you don't have a good motherboard it is but an exercise in frustration. Get a better board.

Ah, ok interesting that answered some questions.  There's nothing definite I could find on the bus speed since it's a 1336 system.  I believe it's an 800mhz processor that I found data about on it, in a really obscure place,  but I was told that 1366 systems don't have fsb's anymore so there isn't a bus speed really since it's in the chip.

The memory is 1333mhz, and or I have 2 sets of memory right now, the other is 1600mhz dominator, but only 2 gigs.  I'll probably pull out the 1333 stuff, but was hoping I could just get them both up to 1333, and still have 4 gigs.  They both seem to be lowered to 800mhz right now.

So to clock the processor at 2.4, I'm going for 16x150 right?

Title: Overclocking
Post by: J888www on Tue, 05 October 2010, 11:03:43

I just do not comprehend the necessity to do this , do that, do this etcetera. With my Core i5 750 + ASRock P55 Deluxe mobo, I set it to 4GHz and viola, it's overclocked + stable. Most modern mobo have auto overclock settings.

Title: Overclocking
Post by: J888www on Tue, 05 October 2010, 11:24:51

Quote from: ripster;230006

Yeah but where is the fun in that.

I never thought of it in those terms, now I'm flabbergasted, to think those manufacturers are becoming killjoys.

Title: Overclocking
Post by: zefrer on Tue, 05 October 2010, 11:28:59

Quote from: chimera15;229982

Ah, ok interesting that answered some questions.  There's nothing definite I could find on the bus speed since it's a 1336 system.  I believe it's an 800mhz processor that I found data about on it, in a really obscure place,  but I was told that 1366 systems don't have fsb's anymore so there isn't a bus speed really since it's in the chip.

The memory is 1333mhz, and or I have 2 sets of memory right now, the other is 1600mhz dominator, but only 2 gigs.  I'll probably pull out the 1333 stuff, but was hoping I could just get them both up to 1333, and still have 4 gigs.  They both seem to be lowered to 800mhz right now.

So to clock the processor at 2.4, I'm going for 16x150 right?

Yes, keep ratio at 16, raise BLCK to 150. But do lock pcie and memory frequencies before raising BLCK.

I don't know where you're getting this 800mhz number from but I suspect it is not what you think it is. If you can post a cpu-z screenshot that would be very helpful.

I was referring to QPI speed btw. Not to confuse you too much but while there is no such thing as a front side bus on i7s there's still 'a' bus that connects cpu to memory. Even if the cpu and memory controller are on same chip there still needs to be a connection from one to the other, ie a 'bus' of some sort. On i7s that's called the QPI or Quick Path Interconnect. Its speed is also a result of multiplying a ratio with BCLK.

How memory frequency is calculated on i7s is.. weird - and might be a bit confusing depending on what motherboard/bios you have.

Here's (http://www.maximumpc.com/article/features/ultimate_core_i7_overclocking_guide_we_push_nehalem_its_limits) a very good article on overclocking i7s.

At stock your i7 920 should have a memory speed of 1,066MHz (memory multiplier on 920 is 8, times the BCLK of 133)

Title: Overclocking
Post by: chimera15 on Tue, 05 October 2010, 11:51:23

Here.

(http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4130/5054244995_ef9aa8e850.jpg)

The memory is pretty funky.  I'm not sure I understand what it's telling me at all.

(http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4104/5054879188_f179b86d7f.jpg)

(http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4129/5054260875_ea5c10f980.jpg)

(http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4124/5054878994_8de07fee5a.jpg)

Why does it say the frequency is 1600mhz?  I have 1333mhz rated ram in there?  The bios is telling me it's only 800mhz?

The geil sticks are the junkier ones, but they're showing they can be clocked higher than the corsair dominator 1600mhz according to that...doesn't make much sense.

Title: Overclocking
Post by: zefrer on Tue, 05 October 2010, 11:57:48

Quote from: chimera15;230020

Here.

Show Image

(http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4130/5054244995_ef9aa8e850.jpg)

And the memory tab please. Cpu-z says you have a Xeon btw. Do you? :)

Title: Overclocking
Post by: chimera15 on Tue, 05 October 2010, 12:09:31

Quote from: zefrer;230024

And the memory tab please. Cpu-z says you have a Xeon btw. Do you? :)

yes, it's a l5506 es, as it says.  Intel confidential. It was about $150 cheaper than an i7. lol  Not as powerful of course, but looks like it's about as powerful as a socket 775 quad.  I edited my post for the memory.

http://browse.geekbench.ca/geekbench2/view/296551 (http://browse.geekbench.ca/geekbench2/view/296551)

Title: Overclocking
Post by: zefrer on Tue, 05 October 2010, 12:58:39

Your memory speed is indeed ddr3-800, memory tab/dram frequency * 2 for DDR.

The NB frequency on i7s is the uncore frequency ie cache/memory controller etc frequency and should be roughly twice your memory frequency (uncore ratio is exactly twice of memory ratio on i7s).

The SPD timings are just pre-programmed settings on the stick of ram itself. It's what the bios uses when it's set on auto. They do not necesarily represent the maximum the memory can do, for that go the manufacturer and find out what the memory you bought is rated for and at what voltage. The manufacturer may rate the memory at a higher speed with an increased voltage. Corsair are known for this, especially the dominator range (it's a good thing).

If you go above what that manufacturer has specified the memory to run at, only then are you overclocking it, obviously.

First off, are you using different sticks of ram in the same channel? If so that's probably what set the memory to ddr3-800 in the first place.

Title: Overclocking
Post by: chimera15 on Tue, 05 October 2010, 13:02:10

Quote from: zefrer;230045

Your memory speed is indeed ddr3-800, memory tab/dram frequency * 2 for DDR.

The NB frequency on i7s is the uncore frequency ie cache/memory controller etc frequency and should be roughly twice your memory frequency (uncore ratio is exactly twice of memory ratio on i7s).

The SPD timings are just pre-programmed settings on the stick of ram itself. It's what the bios uses when it's set on auto. They do not necesarily represent the maximum the memory can do, for that go the manufacturer and find out what the memory you bought is rated for and at what voltage. The manufacturer may rate the memory at a higher speed with an increased voltage. Corsair are known for this, especially the dominator range (it's a good thing).

If you go above what that manufacturer has specified the memory to run at, only then are you overclocking it, obviously.

First off, are you using different sticks of ram in the same channel? If so that's probably what set the memory to ddr3-800 in the first place.

I had 2 sticks of the geil first.   Then I decided to try it with the dominator separately, and that worked, then I decided I'd try both at the same time.  They were all 800mhz in the bios.  I couldn't see any easy way to change that like I can with my 775 systems.

Yeah I got the 2 dominators on the first channel, then 1 stick of giel on that same channel, then 1 stick on the second channel, which is how the motherboard manual said to populate it.  But even without this configuration, just 2 in there by themselves they were always 800mhz.

Title: Overclocking
Post by: zefrer on Tue, 05 October 2010, 13:09:34

Ok, well that Xeon cpu must have a stock memory frequency of 800 then. I am not familiar with Xeon memory settings so not sure. If so, it also means your memory ratio is 6x (6*133 = 800). You can confirm in bios.

Stick the corsair in there (just corsair), hopefully you have 3 sticks of it, and just raise the BCLK. It's that easy really.

If you can't find a setting to change the memory frequency in bios (may not have one, don't know/depends) you're still ok. With a 6x memory ratio you can go right up to 200 BCLK (3.2Ghz) and still be at ddr3-1200 so it's not like you're going to run out of memory headroom anytime soon :)

Edit: I noticed you said you have 2 sticks of each. It's generally not a good idea to mix different sticks of ram in the same channel. You have a tripple channel motherboard/cpu which means each channel is made out of 3 dimm slots on the motherboard. For your testing you can just use the two corsairs, or one, then once you have your stable cpu overclock try two corsair one of the other in same channel. If it works it works.

Title: Overclocking
Post by: chimera15 on Tue, 05 October 2010, 13:13:29

Quote from: zefrer;230051

Ok, well that Xeon cpu must have a stock memory frequency of 800 then. I am not familiar with Xeon memory settings so not sure. If so, it also means your memory ratio is 6x (6*133 = 800). You can confirm in bios.

Stick the corsair in there (just corsair), hopefully you have 3 sticks of it, and just raise the BCLK. It's that easy really.

If you can't find a setting to change the memory frequency in bios (may not have one, don't know/depends) you're still ok. With a 6x memory ratio you can go right up to 200 BCLK (3.2Ghz) and still be at ddr3-1200 so it's not like you're going to run out of memory headroom anytime soon :)

Hmm, ok, that's interesting info then.  That's probably what I was seeing the 800mhz for and assuming it was the fsb speed.

Title: Overclocking
Post by: Rajagra on Tue, 05 October 2010, 20:17:00

Quote from: alec;229890

Can't say it wastes much time

It does if you run thorough tests like you're supposed to. If you don't run Prime95 for a minimum of 12 hours, or similar, then you haven't tested it properly. I'm not doing that at every stage that seems to work. Sod that.

Title: Overclocking
Post by: zefrer on Tue, 05 October 2010, 20:47:30

You do that at the highest frequency, not every stage. A single run is enough to judge stability at any speed. Errors usually show up in a couple minutes.

Title: Overclocking
Post by: chimera15 on Tue, 05 October 2010, 23:28:42

The one time I tried to overclock one of my 775 systems before as I recall, I could barely get any performance enhancements without constant bsods, so I just set it back to stock. lol  I probably needed to raise voltages or do something I wasn't aware of.

Title: Overclocking
Post by: Rajagra on Tue, 05 October 2010, 23:47:35

Or drop voltages (to make it run cooler.) Ah the mysteries of overclocking!

Title: Overclocking
Post by: audioave10 on Wed, 06 October 2010, 00:15:34

It helps if the motherboard is made for it. My Gigabyte UD3L 775/ Intel E8500 combo was easy (with 1066 RAM). Set the bus to 400Mhz plus add one .025 voltage to the CPU and you get 3.8Ghz (stock was 3.16). Its been that way for a year and a half now.
Its always easier on the mobo if you have only 2 dimms populated instead of all four (at least it used to be that way).
That's 400 x 9.5 multiplier = 3.8Ghz.

Title: Overclocking
Post by: Hak Foo on Wed, 06 October 2010, 00:42:52

Years ago, it mattered:

486DX-33@40, DX2-66@80.  That 40MHz FSB made those 1Mb "Super-VGA" cards really run.

A K6-233 at 225 would actually outperform stock due to the higher bus speed; I had a lucky one which would run at 250 (3x83) or 262 (3.5x75) passably; it would POST at 292 (3.5x83) with a voltage tweak but not run.

Duron 1.6 at 1980MHz was the last big one I did.  One clock tick higher and it went to a new memory timing regime which blew out my DDR266 memory.

I couldn't get much more than 100MHz more out of my old S939 4600+, but it might have been the weird ULI M1695 mobo I used.

My Core 2 stuff did better- an E6750 could go to about 3.5 on a kamikaze run; an E7200 could hit 4.0 but barely.  (50% over stock).  The 7200 was nice since I got it for no charge- modded my 1391401 and earned a contest prize for it.

You've got a P35-UD3L?  I had one, traded it in when I got an Asus M3A78 (sucks) and later a MA790X-UD4 (nicer)

I have the black-label Phenoms but don't do much with it- both a 9950 and a 940 are at stock.

Title: Overclocking
Post by: audioave10 on Wed, 06 October 2010, 01:03:55

Its a P45 - UD3L.
I also have the MA790X-UD4L and it runs my Phenom II 945 quad (95 watt version) at 3.4Ghz. I haven't pushed it much yet.

Title: Overclocking
Post by: zefrer on Wed, 06 October 2010, 05:32:36

Quote from: Rajagra;230297

Or drop voltages (to make it run cooler.) Ah the mysteries of overclocking!

If your aim is to overclock dropping voltage can only make things _worse_ :)

In overclocking the answer is always this. "If it won't run, it needs more voltage." I'm sure you've seen or heard about Pentium4s being run at 8Ghz  (http://www.engadget.com/2007/01/24/pentium-4-overclocked-to-8ghz-lets-see-your-fancy-core-2-try-t/)and etc.

Of course those pesky laws of physics get in the way and past a certain point you get diminishing returns. For example a 0.5V increase may get you a 1Ghz overclock but to go another 500Mhz you would need another 1V. Then for another 500Mhz another 1.5V and so on. Eventually you can't cool it fast enough. You can get better cooling but the cycle just repeats.

As far as being "worth it", it's so easy these days I don't see why you shouldn't do it. A decent motherboard can do it for you if you don't want to bother, the rest of us do it for fun as well as 'profit' :)
A decent overclock for a core2 would be 3Ghz to ~3.8Ghz, for an i7 3Ghz to ~3.9-4.0.
A 30% increase in frequency with minimal effort is pretty significant.

But yeah Hak Foo, I also remember the joy of overclocking a 300Mhz processor to 450Mhz and getting almost twice the performance you had before and better performance than anything you could buy.

Title: Overclocking
Post by: timw4mail on Wed, 06 October 2010, 07:25:10

Hehehe...50%...

I've got my Phenom II 1090T x6 at 4.0GHz from a stock 3.2GHz on air cooling.

http://valid.canardpc.com/show_oc.php?id=1416368

Title: Overclocking
Post by: Rajagra on Wed, 06 October 2010, 11:05:03

Oh my. Currently testing my 2.6 i7 920 running at 4.2GHz!
Only Memtest so far, but it's looking good.
Base clock is at 210 and I only stopped there because the video said that was the high target.

Edit> Spoke too soon, Memtest froze. Knocking it down to 3.8GHz (210*18).

Title: Overclocking
Post by: zefrer on Thu, 07 October 2010, 06:34:46

How'd it go chimera15? Did you blow your power supply or something? :heh:

Title: Overclocking
Post by: chimera15 on Thu, 07 October 2010, 06:55:40

Haven't tried it yet.  I'm still kinda scared, but busy with school mostly.   I'll probably try again on sunday or monday.


Also there's only 12 days till the release of New Vegas... so sort of wanting to at least try to play it on this system before I take a chance of ruining it.

One thing I was wondering about was in OS overclocking software/tools?  I know intel chipset motherboards have os based overclocking utilities that make it apparently really easy.  Is there anything that might work for all motherboards, or all x58 systems or something?

Hmm might have found something.

http://www.asrock.com/feature/OCTuner/

yeah looks like my mobo is supported. x58 extreme.

http://www.asrock.com/mb/download.asp?Model=X58%20Extreme&o=Win7 (http://www.asrock.com/mb/download.asp?Model=X58%20Extreme&o=Win7)

This makes it super easy.  I'm up to about 140 right now from within the os.   I guess I need to benchmark/memtest it once I get to 150, or 2.4 which is where I think I'll stop.

Title: Overclocking
Post by: chimera15 on Thu, 07 October 2010, 07:27:24

Alright, got it up to 2.4.  The little meter on oc tuner shows that it's really in the red.  So I guess I'll stop.  I got 500 more points on geekbench than my stock.  Up to 4800

http://browse.geekbench.ca/geekbench2/view/297644 (http://browse.geekbench.ca/geekbench2/view/297644)

It's strange it still says it's at 2.13 ghz though...

qpi frequency is now 4800

Broke the 7 mark for the windows experience rating for the first time for my processor. lol  Rated a 7.1.  Was at 6.9 before.  Strangely the memory is still only a 5.5.

nb frequency for the memory is now 1800.


I got a memory error when I went to reboot the system...  Also Warrock wouldn't stay open.  So it's either octuner that's closing it or there are problems.  I guess I need to raise the processor voltage or something?  Any suggestions what to raise it to?  I don't know what would be too much or too little.

Alright, I reset the bios since it seemed to be ok except for that one error with octuner.  There didn't seem to be any heat issues anyway.  It only raised the temperature by 1 degree when I ran prime95 and maxed the processor out for a while.

It didn't boot initially, then came up when I restarted.  The system seems to be noticeably snappier.  Warrock is working.

Title: Overclocking
Post by: zefrer on Thu, 07 October 2010, 08:19:10

Eh, I'd avoid those software tools if I were you. Too finicky..

But really don't be so worried, it's perfectly safe. If the cpu gets too hot it'll just shut it self down.

You won't see much of a difference in temperature without a voltage increase.

Run prime95 for at least one full run to test stability. It will tell you if it finds errors, an error means instability. Just cause it boots doesn't make it stable.

See how high you can get (while being stable) without changing the voltage first I'd say.

Title: Overclocking
Post by: Brodie337 on Thu, 07 October 2010, 08:27:46

OK, I'm not overly familiar with overclocking Intel's stuff, but you should be doing it through the BIOS. Way less likely to screw up.

You dont mention if you have any sort of aftermarket cooling?

Intel stock coolers are pretty cruddy, so watch your temps very closely. Now, I know it's almost a cardinal sin to link to OCN here, but have a read of this:
http://www.overclock.net/intel-cpus/538439-guide-overclocking-core-i7-920-930-a.html

VERY comprehensive.

Title: Overclocking
Post by: chimera15 on Thu, 07 October 2010, 08:39:35

Quote from: Brodie337;230808

OK, I'm not overly familiar with overclocking Intel's stuff, but you should be doing it through the BIOS. Way less likely to screw up.

You dont mention if you have any sort of aftermarket cooling?

Intel stock coolers are pretty cruddy, so watch your temps very closely. Now, I know it's almost a cardinal sin to link to OCN here, but have a read of this:
http://www.overclock.net/intel-cpus/538439-guide-overclocking-core-i7-920-930-a.html

VERY comprehensive.

I have an intel fan, but it's from one of the higher end i7's, so I think it should be fine for this processor.  It's pretty beefy.  It's at about 45 degrees on average.

Title: Overclocking
Post by: Rajagra on Thu, 07 October 2010, 09:12:59

Quote from: Brodie337;230808

have a read of this: http://www.overclock.net/intel-cpus/538439-guide-overclocking-core-i7-920-930-a.html
VERY comprehensive.

Looks useful. I ended up dropping mine from the flaky 4.2GHz to 3.48GHz (205*17) with almost standard voltages (1.256V VCore). I have 33% more CPU speed and 66% higher memory speed than before! But if I follow that guide I know I can get more.

I don't really need more performance for games, but Vista sure as hell seems less sluggish, hehe.

(http://geekhack.org/attachment.php?attachmentid=12861&d=1286876812)

Title: Overclocking
Post by: Hak Foo on Thu, 07 October 2010, 10:10:35

Quote from: audioave10;230339

Its a P45 - UD3L.
I also have the MA790X-UD4L and it runs my Phenom II 945 quad (95 watt version) at 3.4Ghz. I haven't pushed it much yet.

I had the P35 version; I think it was the first board I specifically desired, rather than 'does it meet my specific minimums'.

It was sold out when I first built, so I got an Abit IP35-E, which ate RAM, so I turned it in and got the DS3L.

Found old validation link for the best run: (http://valid.canardpc.com/cache/banner/421971.png) (http://valid.canardpc.com/show_oc.php?id=421971)

Title: Overclocking
Post by: Phaedrus2129 on Thu, 07 October 2010, 10:19:59

Ack! Do not want!





This is better:
(http://fc07.deviantart.net/fs70/i/2010/276/8/b/lanboy_20_by_phaedrus2401-d301mfn.jpg)

Title: Overclocking
Post by: zefrer on Thu, 07 October 2010, 11:31:30

Quote from: chimera15;230811

I have an intel fan, but it's from one of the higher end i7's, so I think it should be fine for this processor.  It's pretty beefy.  It's at about 45 degrees on average.

No. Buy an aftermarket heatsink ASAP. As mentioned multiple times in this thread, Intel's heatsinks are ****, to put it bluntly.

Intel's heatsinks are only good enough for cooling stock CPUs, not overclocked ones.

See here  (http://www.hardocp.com/article/2010/07/15/q310_cpu_heat_sink_air_cooler_roundup/7) for example.

Even at stock a good heatsink is more than 10C cooler at load than Intel's. At overclocked settings almost 30C cooler. Meanwhile Intel's is hitting 70C.

You have been warned :)

Title: Overclocking
Post by: Phaedrus2129 on Thu, 07 October 2010, 11:43:17

I think he means one of the Extreme Edition CPU coolers, that are packaged with the 980X and 975. They perform pretty well, not really enthusiast level, but they're tower coolers with heatpipes. A bit worse than a TRUE 120.

Title: Overclocking
Post by: zefrer on Thu, 07 October 2010, 12:00:31

He's running a Xeon 2.13Ghz and getting ~45C? Somehow I doubt he's using the 980X (which you can't buy by itself) :)

Title: Overclocking
Post by: chimera15 on Thu, 07 October 2010, 13:10:17

Quote from: zefrer;230887

He's running a Xeon 2.13Ghz and getting ~45C? Somehow I doubt he's using the 980X (which you can't buy by itself) :)

Yes, that's it.  I bought it off ebay from someone who used aftermarket coolers on his and sold the stock ones on ebay.

They don't have heat pipes and stuff.  I forgot which one it is.  It's in the should I go to Japan or build an i7 thread though.   I think it's working fine.  I don't have any spare money right now, so it's ok if it runs a bit hot for a while.  I'm not going to push it past 2.4 for now.   It seems to be stable at this setting without any increase in heat.


I just fired up speedfan for the first time.  It's reporting temps around 40 degrees.

But the big shock is that it has a temp3=127c!  wth is that???

Actually it's got core0-3 = 30c
gpus=57c
temps 1&2 = 40c
hd=40c
temp 3 =127c

geesh  I don't think I want anything on my board that hot.

Interesting, from another board.  "Speed fan is dodgy with some motherboards and gives bogus readings such as temp 3 & temp which arent really connected to any device, its just picking up signals from something it thinks is a temp sensor"

Title: Overclocking
Post by: Phaedrus2129 on Thu, 07 October 2010, 14:06:02

+/-127/128 anything means a bad reading, those are the min/max of an 8-bit integer variable.


Use RealTemp for CPU temperatures and GPU-Z for GPU temperatures.

Title: Overclocking
Post by: alec on Fri, 08 October 2010, 05:17:49

Quote from: Phaedrus2129;230843

This is better:

Show Image

(http://fc07.deviantart.net/fs70/i/2010/276/8/b/lanboy_20_by_phaedrus2401-d301mfn.jpg)

+1

I also have "copper mohawk" Thermaltake V1

Title: Overclocking
Post by: Brodie337 on Fri, 08 October 2010, 06:23:03

Pah! Air cooling!

H50 for the win!

Title: Overclocking
Post by: zefrer on Fri, 08 October 2010, 07:07:31

Pah! Off the shelf liquid coolers. Custom loop! :D

Title: Overclocking
Post by: timw4mail on Fri, 08 October 2010, 09:29:27

If your heatsink doesn't have heatpipes, it's not acceptable for overclocking.

Title: Overclocking
Post by: itlnstln on Fri, 08 October 2010, 09:44:34

Quote from: ripster;231331

Plus you can't smoke it.

Damn, I nearly hosed my HHKB with Diet Dr. Pepper.

Title: Overclocking
Post by: microsoft windows on Sat, 09 October 2010, 17:38:40

Those losers on OCN weren't helpful at all when I asked them how to overclock my Gateway2000.

Title: Overclocking
Post by: Konrad on Sat, 09 October 2010, 21:51:44

Well, if you don't like overclock.net (http://www.overclock.net/) there are a lot of alternative forums,
(overclockers.com (http://www.overclockers.com/), overclockersclub.com (http://www.overclockersclub.com/), extremeoverclocking.com (http://forums.extremeoverclocking.com/), extremesystems.org (http://www.xtremesystems.org/forums/), [h]ardforum.com (http://hardforum.com/forumdisplay.php?f=2), anandtech.com (http://forums.anandtech.com/forumdisplay.php?f=5), blazingpc.com (http://www.blazingpc.com/forum/), devhardware.com (http://www.devhardware.com/forums/cpu-overclocking-19/), many others) ... I just have no clue which is the "best" or is "best" in any given area, lol

Title: Overclocking
Post by: chimera15 on Sun, 10 October 2010, 07:28:54

Quote from: ripster;231927

Hah, even I know that one.  You feed the hamsters steroids and the wheel goes faster.

Show Image

(http://www.gifsoup.com/webroot/animatedgifs/12753_o.gif)

What's the deal with that wheel? They have an rpm meter on it? lol  Is it motorized or something?

Title: Overclocking
Post by: HaaTa on Sun, 10 October 2010, 09:22:26

Quote from: chimera15;232094

What's the deal with that wheel? They have an rpm meter on it? lol  Is it motorized or something?

Definitely motorized, or at least not hamster propelled, as the RPM don't go down at all when the hamster flies off, sorta increase actually...

Title: Overclocking
Post by: Konrad on Sun, 10 October 2010, 15:32:17

Overclocking your hamsters is one approach.
 
Just using better hardware to start with will give better results.
(http://media.merchantcircle.com/25808215/squirrel-on-steroids_full.jpeg)

Title: Overclocking
Post by: D-EJ915 on Sun, 10 October 2010, 16:01:56

Here's my Core 2 Quad I just tried overclocking...pretty good result imo...800MHz memory too.

http://browse.geekbench.ca/geekbench2/view/299161

I need to put less CPU grease on lol

(http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v104/enthauptet/bin/overclock1.png)
(http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v104/enthauptet/bin/overclock2.png)

Title: Overclocking
Post by: Konrad on Sun, 10 October 2010, 16:16:42

That's +65% overclock on a 2.13GHz (133MHzx16) part?
 
Yeah, those CPU temps do look high. I hope that's not just idling on the desktop. (If it is, then I would personally scale back or get a serious cooling upgrade.  Your Vcore looks good to me, but I'm no expert.)
 
[Edit]
 
I have the same Seagate HDD ;)

Title: Overclocking
Post by: D-EJ915 on Sun, 10 October 2010, 23:29:08

I'm thinking the high temp is just from my room being hot as **** , when I opened the door they dropped 4 degrees almost immediately lol.  The temp was basically the same when at stock speed too so I dunno.  I ordered some AS5 to put on so I'll see if that helps, if not I'm gonna send back this ****in tuniq cooler, it's such a pain in the ass to install who knows if it's on right.

http://valid.canardpc.com/show_oc.php?id=1427877

Title: Overclocking
Post by: zefrer on Mon, 11 October 2010, 06:56:56

Quote from: Konrad;232218

That's +65% overclock on a 2.13GHz (133MHzx16) part?
 
Yeah, those CPU temps do look high. I hope that's not just idling on the desktop. (If it is, then I would personally scale back or get a serious cooling upgrade.  Your Vcore looks good to me, but I'm no expert.)
 
[Edit]
 
I have the same Seagate HDD ;)

Different guy, stock clock is 2.5Ghz on his (1Ghz overclock)

Title: Overclocking
Post by: zefrer on Mon, 11 October 2010, 08:29:54

Quote from: D-EJ915;232376

I'm thinking the high temp is just from my room being hot as **** , when I opened the door they dropped 4 degrees almost immediately lol.  The temp was basically the same when at stock speed too so I dunno.  I ordered some AS5 to put on so I'll see if that helps, if not I'm gonna send back this ****in tuniq cooler, it's such a pain in the ass to install who knows if it's on right.

http://valid.canardpc.com/show_oc.php?id=1427877

Have you ran prime95/super pi etc to test stability? I very much doubt it's stable if it idles at 60C..

Title: Overclocking
Post by: Konrad on Mon, 11 October 2010, 17:08:11

lol, it's only ~50C (48C-54C), not 60C.  Plus it apparently drops by ~4C when the ambient is cooled down (ie, door to the room is opened).
 
But that's still pretty high.  Especially if that's on idle ... run a test (super pi) to see what happens under stress load.  It's not a useful OC if it's unstable (crashes whenever you actually play games or do anything).  But hey, it's your money, go ahead and cook your CPU, it'll give you an excuse to upgrade in a few months.
 
AS5 is a low performer these days.  For the same money you could get Indigo Xtreme or Shin-Etsu, which both perform much better.

Title: Overclocking
Post by: Rajagra on Mon, 11 October 2010, 17:51:41

Quote from: Konrad;232635

AS5 is a low performer these days.  For the same money you could get Indigo Xtreme or Shin-Etsu, which both perform much better.

If someone sees big performance differences between pastes, I suspect they are applying them badly. Hell, you can get good results without paste provided the surfaces are properly flat and clean. Paste can do no more than fill the air gaps so there is an absolute limit to how much good they can do. There isn't a limit to how much harm they can do - put in too much and you just create an insulating layer.

My overclock seems perfectly stable - except the system can no longer come out of standby. Very odd!

Title: Overclocking
Post by: zefrer on Mon, 11 October 2010, 18:07:39

Quote from: Rajagra;232648

If someone sees big performance differences between pastes, I suspect they are applying them badly. Hell, you can get good results without paste provided the surfaces are properly flat and clean. Paste can do no more than fill the air gaps so there is an absolute limit to how much good they can do. There isn't a limit to how much harm they can do - put in too much and you just create an insulating layer.

My overclock seems perfectly stable - except the system can no longer come out of standby. Very odd!

Well yeah the difference is not huge but there is one. There is actually at least a 4C difference  (http://www.hardocp.com/article/2009/04/07/thermal_paste_shootout_q209/4)(hardocp.com) from the average to one of the best, in overclocked conditions.

And no you can't go without. That's like going without a condom.

Title: Overclocking
Post by: Konrad on Mon, 11 October 2010, 18:47:37

A lot of research and big money goes into engineering better TIMs.
True, for consumer PCs the differences aren't that great, although they have slightly greater significance when pushing hot overclocks.
 
Cheap TIM pastes aren't very efficient. Save money and get poor results.
 
Pay a little more for better ("premium" or silver-bearing) TIMs like AS5 to get good results, though there's no need to buy into the expensive boutique brands.
 
Expensive performance TIMs are better still, though you'll see ever-diminishing gains.
 
It's about bang for the buck, right? The best TIM in the world won't give any real advantage over a cheap one if it's efficienctly conducting heat to a heatsink that's too small for the job. Still, if you're already going to pay for AS5 then why not pay the same for Indigo X?
http://skinneelabs.com/tim2010part1.html?page=1 (http://skinneelabs.com/tim2010part1.html?page=1)

Title: Overclocking
Post by: Rajagra on Mon, 11 October 2010, 21:42:55

Interesting link. Last time I built a system TIM pads were mostly useless. I see he didn't lap the CPU. I won't criticise that, as I've never gone that far. But I wonder what results you'd get by lapping the CPU and heatsink really well, maybe using DMT diamond plates, or even Shapton stones. They are very, very flat (sandpaper on glass just can't compare) and go to insanely fine levels of abrasive, e.g. 1/2 micron (http://www.sharpeningsupplies.com/Shapton-GlassStone-30000-Grit-P224C84.aspx?UserID=9946759&SessionID=9efZgnJYB68BI5bpRhsq). You wouldn't buy these just to lap one install, but someone who was building performance systems regularly just might get some.

The finest diamond plate I have is 3 micron/8000 grit. I may have to play with an old system. :madgrin:

Title: Overclocking
Post by: D-EJ915 on Mon, 11 October 2010, 22:29:42

FWIW it went up to around 60-4 C if I remember when doing hyperpi or whichever is the newest on all 4 cores, I don't really remember lol.

Title: Overclocking
Post by: Konrad on Tue, 12 October 2010, 02:12:47

Haha, I've polished my HS and IHS to mirror shine, then applied IndigoX with a razor blade.  I seriously nerded out on it here (http://www.thebestcasescenario.com/forum/showthread.php?t=24137) a few months back.
 
And I'm a noob compared to some of those guys.  They remove the IHS entirely (with a blowtorch, lol the only way) for direct-die liquid cooling.

Title: Overclocking
Post by: Rajagra on Tue, 12 October 2010, 03:59:54

Funny you got info from a laser forum, it reminds me of this article (http://www.overclockers.com/why-heatsink-polishing-might-be-a-bad-idea/) that gives a convincing argument against over-polishing the surfaces.

Quote

if we made the mating surface of the aluminum block too smooth, we lost cooling efficiency – similarly if it was too coarse. To the extent that if we polished the surface, we got significantly worse performance than when the heatsink surface was matte after lapping with, say, 400-600 grade carborundum.

It's a good reminder that sometimes what seems obviously true ... is not.