EXPERIMENT : 45nm CPU Vcore testing - UPDATE PAGE 31 - Page 4 - Overclock.net

FSF-Foxhound · 08-05-09

subscribed, hopefully this can get people to realize that going nuts and saying "keep below 1.45!1!" and such, does not make any sense.

I say start with 1.55 VCore.

almighty15 · 08-05-09

Quote:

Originally Posted by FSF-Foxhound

I say start with 1.55 VCore.

You bet your ass I am

From looking at the PDC E6300 thread over at XS it seems that if I have a good chip 5Ghz could be very possible with between 1.55 and 1.6v

ChickenInferno · 08-05-09

Quote:

Originally Posted by almighty15

Asking many people on this forum on what they think is the safe max voltage for a 45nm chip will result in loads of different answears, FACT is that no one really knows. We all know what Intels spec sheet says on the matter but I think that Intel are being very conservative.

Smart Man.

FSF-Foxhound · 08-05-09

Quote:

Originally Posted by ChickenInferno

Smart Man.

you should of underlined "are"

GigaByte · 08-05-09

Quote:

Originally Posted by FSF-Foxhound

subscribed, hopefully this can get people to realize that going nuts and saying "keep below 1.45!1!" and such, does not make any sense.

I say start with 1.55 VCore.

As enough people haven't degraded/destroyed their CPUs going above absolute max, I'd think Intel knows what they're saying when it comes to their product.

@OP You should keep VTT 0.05v ~ 0.10v below the vcore to help simulate the real world, most people that dare to run constantly this high usually have a VTT over 1.40v at least and VTT seems to damage CPUs quicker than vcore.

ChickenInferno · 08-05-09

Quote:

Originally Posted by FSF-Foxhound

you should of underlined "are"

Yeah, I know but the point was not the grammatical error as for that I'm not a stickler.

TheShaman · 08-05-09

Subscribed. I really wanted to do this myself but I don't have the resources.

+1 for you man

almighty15 · 08-05-09

Quote:

Originally Posted by GigaByte

As enough people haven't degraded/destroyed their CPUs going above absolute max, I'd think Intel knows what they're saying when it comes to their product.

@OP You should keep VTT 0.05v ~ 0.10v below the vcore to help simulate the real world, most people that dare to run constantly this high usually have a VTT over 1.40v at least and VTT seems to damage CPUs quicker than vcore.

Yea that's the plan, keep everything else low except the Vcore.

I could go completely silly with this but there's no point, the point of this is to see how the chip acts in real life normal conditions

GigaByte · 08-05-09

Quote:

Originally Posted by almighty15

Yea that's the plan, keep everything else low except the Vcore.

I could go completely silly with this but there's no point, the point of this is to see how the chip acts in real life normal conditions

I ment it like this:

Vcore: 1.55v - VTT 1.45v ~ 1.50v
Vcore: 1.60v - VTT 1.50v ~ 1.55v

etc, not sure if you understood.

ChickenInferno · 08-05-09

Something to keep in mind according to Intel Documentation and this is summing it up, a stable overclock under the max voltages will not cause degredation. This test would put this idea to the test. No matter what happens make sure that the overclock is beyond stable (Prime95 Small FTTs 12hrs and LinX All Memory 100 runs).

BTW, 1.4v VTT should get you around 500FSB

View Poll Results: What do you think 45nm chips will take?
1.3 -1.4 Vcore	71	19.29%
1.4 -1.5 Vcore	136	36.96%
1.5 -1.6 Vcore	161	43.75%
Voters: 368. You may not vote on this poll

		Overclock.net - Overclocking.net > Intel > Intel CPUs
EXPERIMENT : 45nm CPU Vcore testing - UPDATE PAGE 31

Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)