Asus Rampage Formula (X48) Thread

[Tijsbeer]

Anyone?

[Demented]

Originally Posted by Tijsbeer

Hi, I'm quite new to overclocking (a friend of mine just recently got me interested), and therefore also new to this forum (this is my first post here :-) ). I just bought an Asus Rampage Formula board, because my P5E-VM HDMI died. And that's a good thing, because the S-ATA connectors on that board interfered with my video card fans anyway :-)

And I've never seen so many options in a BIOS before; I've got a lot of reading to do!

But in the meantime, I already started to overclock a bit, and I'm now measuring the CPU temps with different programs. And now I'm wondering if those temps aren't a bit high (see screenshot)? And also which program reports them correctly?

And also a completely different question: I have an E7200 processor too; which would be better for overclocking: that one or the E6550?

Your temps seem a tad high mainly considering you have a TRUE on there, which most here say is one of the best coolers. When I had my E6600 on my P5N-E SLi, my temps would hit low 60's as well under full load, but I just had the Zalman 9500.

RealTemp is a pretty accurate temp monitor, but so is CoreTemp. Find out what your TJ Max is for yer chip, and then you can adjust RealTemp so that it gives accurate readings. I'm pretty sure that CoreTemp is reporting your temps correctly.

Temps of that nature might mean the TRUE isn't seated properly. What are your idle temps?

EDIT: The E7200 has the 45nm architecture, while the E6550 has the 65nm. However, you have a higher stock FSB on the E6550. Not sure, hopefully others can suggest help on this.

[Tijsbeer]

Originally Posted by Demented

Your temps seem a tad high mainly considering you have a TRUE on there, which most here say is one of the best coolers. When I had my E6600 on my P5N-E SLi, my temps would hit low 60's as well under full load, but I just had the Zalman 9500.

RealTemp is a pretty accurate temp monitor, but so is CoreTemp. Find out what your TJ Max is for yer chip, and then you can adjust RealTemp so that it gives accurate readings. I'm pretty sure that CoreTemp is reporting your temps correctly.

Temps of that nature might mean the TRUE isn't seated properly. What are your idle temps?

EDIT: The E7200 has the 45nm architecture, while the E6550 has the 65nm. However, you have a higher stock FSB on the E6550. Not sure, hopefully others can suggest help on this.

Thanks for the reply! It got me thinking...! Like I said, I'm new to overclocking; I always build my rigs for silence, so my standard practice is to tune the fans down to the point of near inaudibility. Completely forgot that they could run a LOT faster

So now the temps are way better (47 degrees Celsius load, 33 idle)!

I set the FSB to 467, set all voltages to the standard values in the BIOS and it still is no more than 54 degrees on load according to Real Temp (that program gives the highest numbers)! I've had it booting Windows up to 475 MHz FSB so far, but I get errors when I use Prime95. Would that be the NB or the RAM's fault?

...and I sincerely hope someone would be kind enough to explain the advantages of 45nm vs higher standard FSB

[Demented]

Originally Posted by Tijsbeer

Thanks for the reply! It got me thinking...! Like I said, I'm new to overclocking; I always build my rigs for silence, so my standard practice is to tune the fans down to the point of near inaudibility. Completely forgot that they could run a LOT faster

So now the temps are way better (47 degrees Celsius load, 33 idle)!

I set the FSB to 467, set all voltages to the standard values in the BIOS and it still is no more than 54 degrees on load according to Real Temp (that program gives the highest numbers)! I've had it booting Windows up to 475 MHz FSB so far, but I get errors when I use Prime95. Would that be the NB or the RAM's fault?

...and I sincerely hope someone would be kind enough to explain the advantages of 45nm vs higher standard FSB

I have recently begun climbing a higher OC. I was going from 4.05 to 4.20, and I tend to blue screen with OCCT when I also OC my RAM. So, to alleviate this temporarily, I just keep my RAM at recommended volts and speed.

Your Prime95 errors are probably related to both the RAM and the NB, since it's the NB that controls the RAM. Not sure what to suggest other than playing with the RAM timings and volts, and messing with the NB as well.

I'm still working on some tests, but for now, as I said, I have my RAM at 1062Mhz(stock is 1066), 2.10 volts, and my NB is as low as I can do it to stay stable. Once I understand my CPU OC a bit better, and get better info on what things to increase and how much on my NB and RAM, I'll push this baby to its limits.

However, for now, I'm happy.

EDIT: From what I have read the 45nm chips are designed to run cooler, thus reducing fan noise. As far as Stock FSB. Well, I see it as if you have a higher stock FSB, like 1333Mhz, as apposed to 1066Mhz, then you will have a higher ceiling with the higher stock FSB. My old E6600 was a stock 1066Mhz, and I was able to push it to 1333Mhz. Not sure if I could have gone farther, but the work to get there seemed too much. However, with my E8500, stock FSB is 1333Mhz, and I've got it running now at 1768Mhz, without much work. That could also be attributed to the $%nm architecture of the E8500 as well, but I'm no expert.

Hope that helps!

[Ghostleader]

Originally Posted by Tijsbeer

Thanks for the reply! It got me thinking...! Like I said, I'm new to overclocking; I always build my rigs for silence, so my standard practice is to tune the fans down to the point of near inaudibility. Completely forgot that they could run a LOT faster

So now the temps are way better (47 degrees Celsius load, 33 idle)!

I set the FSB to 467, set all voltages to the standard values in the BIOS and it still is no more than 54 degrees on load according to Real Temp (that program gives the highest numbers)! I've had it booting Windows up to 475 MHz FSB so far, but I get errors when I use Prime95. Would that be the NB or the RAM's fault?

...and I sincerely hope someone would be kind enough to explain the advantages of 45nm vs higher standard FSB

Probably you have to raise VTT, NBv and DIMMv

If you can´t boot into OS probably to low VTT, boot into OS but not stable with blend, to low NBv or DIMMv.

Raise VTT to 1,30-1,40 to deal with FSB 450+ on a 65nm chip.

Raise NBv to 1,40-1,60 to deal with FSB 450+ and also depending on how you have your Ai Twister, Transaction Booster and Common Performance Level set, if Ai Twister are set towards Strong or Stronger, higher NBv, if Transaction Booster manual and Common Performance Level set to a low value, higher NBv.

Are you sure that your ram can do 900MHz+ with 1,90v or lower, because with FSB 467 you probably run your ram at ~935 at 1,86v, are you sure that they are stable at that speed. May have to raise DIMM to 2,00v+.


Finally I want to add some about the 45nm vs 65vs, don´t forget that 45nm have larger L2 cache and with the new tech you get better game performance if you compare the two, if you are into that.

[RPIJG]

possible that those patriots run similar IC's to the G.Skills I had that were DDR2-1100 on only 1.8-1.9V.

[Oupavoc]

Had the bloody "CPU INIT" error and the computer would not post on friday. So I had to RMA the board to ASUS. I was expecting to wait a month to get a new board, turn out they crossed shipped me a board got it today they shipped it out on the 2nd of march. That's incredible I got the new board in two days which was great but this is my 3rd Rampage Formula board. I hope this one will last a bit longer. Oh yeah I've only owned this board for 6 months, so 3 new boards in 6 months is crazy. Well I'm happy I'm up and running thanks to the fast shipping. Just updated the bios to 803 and everything is ok. Anyone else got that error before.

[Hemi]

How are the new bios versions for this board? I'm still running 0219 and running 4.04Ghz stable 471 fsb 1.384v. ALthough not stable by any stretch, I've even been able to boot at 4.22Ghz, I suspect the old "if it ain't broke..." comment would hold true? or is there more advantages with the new bios available?

[Oupavoc]

I don't know about advantages the RMA board had 0219 bios on it and everything was running great. Newer bios just fixes know issues that's it, gpu, men and rain card compatibilities. As for performance increase I haven't seen any.

[TFL Replica]

Bios 308 has pimped out tREF (and thus scores higher in synthetic benches).
Bios 410 through 701 were mostly various small fixes and adjusments to various voltage controls (on auto)
Bios 802 beta was the first to do 515FSB with quads and added clock scew for cpu and nb.
Bios 803 is the latest.

Definitely go for the latest if you have a quad. For most other purposes 308 is a very nice/stable bios.