error10

And the Q9550 is cheaper.

__________________
The Ice Stone has melted!

I did error10's Windows Challenge and I now am an MCSE: Minesweeper Consultant and Solitaire Expert!

rock3ralex

all I have to say is that this mobo is freaking awesome. I was going to do a little review of it but it looks like I don't need two. I love the fact that all of the connectors and cables it comes with are uv reactive. Check out the pics.

__________________

Villainstone

What would you suggest I do to get higher than 500FSB. You can already see that the NB voltage is much higher than what you are using. I have mine set to 1.46 but that doesn't seem all that high to me but hell I have been wrong many time before LOL.

At any rate I am having trouble getting over 505mhz. I have not tried any serious tweaking as I do not know where to go from here. I tried the next notch up in voltages on the vcore, vdimm, vmch, pll, and vtt. but still fail to boot. You can see my voltages in the pics above so on notch up from those setting in the BIOS. Can I get some suggestions please.

Oh and I have an 80mm and a 120mm blowing on the NB, and fans on the PWM HS's as well. I'm sure I can lower the voltage, and I will try, but I also think that 1.46 is good under the fans. It feels cool to me as far as just touching it and feeling around.

__________________

Robilar

I would suggest that your cpu is hitting an FSB wall.

The E0 chips have more overhead (E0 9550 and E0 9650 seem to get the best results on this board).

500 FSB with that chip is pretty amazing when you consider its low multi.

Villainstone

IMO I disagree depending on significance of CPU OC. Here is what I mean and this is only from a logical stand point, I mean I have never tested this just kinda put 2 and 2 together so to speak.

FSB 450 and 500... 450x8, or 500x7, 3.6 vs 3.5 on the CPU side. Looking at it from a FSB/RAM side... 450/900 vs 500/1000, from there the choice seems obvious. The question remains is the extra 100mhz on the CPU more of a system improvement than the the extra 50 on both the FSB/RAM...

__________________

Robilar

depends on your ram ratios.

I have gone so far as to test both ways with ram set to 800 mhz via dividers. (with 6 different boards, both nvidia and intel based) There is always a slight improvement.

for example 450x8 or 9x400. 9x400 nets out faster.

this is taking increase in ram speed out of the equation though.

the reason why the extreme chips have an unlocked multi (I have a C2D X6800 and a C2D QX9650) is because higher multi's allow you to ramp up overall cpu speed with lower system overhead (it also reduces cpu temps as it needs slightly less vcore).

Villainstone

Right so now take the RAM into consideration and then total system performance. I am not talking about running SuperPI, or anything like that. I mean does windows boot faster, do DVD's burn faster, games, .RAR files, etc... I just find it some what difficult to fully understand how 400x9 (3.6) runs faster than 450x8 (3.6). Or even 500x7 (3.5). It also raises the question as to why we are looking for the MB with the capability to reach the highest FSB. Either way the highest possible system is what the real goal is, to make the CPU, FSB, RAM all run as fast as we can get them.

I guess I can try to see how it works from my experience. I will have to make sure that I have all tested setting totally stable first, and that can take a few days. I rarily have time to do such things. I will see what happens.

__________________

Villainstone

Here is Prime95 stable after 9 and a half hours. I guess that I can just lower the FSB and keep all the other settings the same and test the debate at hand. Should I start a new thread or post my results here?

EDIT: Notice that I am in fact able to lower the vMCH to 1.4v and still remain stable. I was happy about this for reasons obvious to us, but 510 still seems to be a long shot. It could be the CPU having a wall, or just the board.

Attached Thumbnails

 

__________________

Robilar

I would suggest posting them here as your results are due to the board and this thread is based on the board itself.

Villainstone

Not a problem my man I will get them hear ASAP. But I may still open a thread if I get anything that IMO is valuable to the community... you know what I mean.

I think I will burn a DVD (the same DVD each time), I will extract a large .RAR file (like a DVD). I need some other "REAL" test, so any suggestion before I start?I guess I can try and see some FPS in games but we all know that little improvement in games is achieved from system OC, and relies on GPU OC more than CPU.

Burn DVD, Rip DVD, extract DVD, and I can even convert a DVD. I will see what results I achieve at different FSB and multi. The only real problem I foresee is that my multi only goes to 7.5. I will need to keep the CPU clock speed a bit lower but as long as I run consistent and not allow variable to interfere.

__________________