Overclock.net › Forums › Intel › Intel CPUs › Did we ever come a conclusion on safe SB voltages?
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Did we ever come a conclusion on safe SB voltages? - Page 9

post #81 of 93
Quote:
Originally Posted by pioneerisloud View Post
Mine did. I required 1.425v for 4.8GHz when I first got it. Now it takes 1.45v for 4.8GHz. My first chip did the same thing (required 1.375v for 4.8, 1.40v for 4.8 later).

However once this "burn in" (as I like to call it) happened, the chip has been rock solid since then. My "burn in" happened about 2 weeks into owning the chip. That was back in March. I've been rock solid stable since March at 4.8 and higher, with no more vcore needed than normal.

I don't know why, but it seems to be a trend that after a few weeks to a month or so, these chips tend to want a tad more voltage, but once that happens...it doesn't happen again.

And I've kept my chip under 1.52v as stated by Intel. My overclock right now uses 1.525v under a light load and 1.488v for full load (I never see it over 1.525v).
That is quite interesting. Maybe the transistors are just settling in? I'll have to keep an eye on my new 2500K. When the chip needed more vcore how did you know? BSOD or just general instability?

I read in another thread that Intel has updated the vcc limit on their mobile Sandy Bridge CPU's.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Wogga View Post
intel updated datasheets for SB. core voltage part for desktop SB wasnt changed but for mobile ones it states this


i dont think that mobile SB are stronger than desktop ones
so 1.56 is really too much, but 1.52 should be fine
I wonder if the same applies to the desktop variant.
ColdCut
(14 items)
 
YetiKube
(19 items)
 
 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
5960x Asus Rampage V Extreme  XFX 295x2 Core Hydro Edition CORSAIR Vengeance LPX 16GB DDR4 2800 
Hard DriveHard DriveHard DriveOptical Drive
Samsung 850 Pro  Samsung 850 EVO Western Digital Black 3TB  LG Bluray Burner 16x 
CoolingOSMonitorPower
H110i GT Windows 8.1 Pro Asus 4k Corsair AX1500i  
CaseAudio
Corsair 900D Stock 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
(1) 2500K ASRock Extreme3 Gen3 GTX 780 Classified Mushkin 996995 DDR3 1600 (2 Sticks) 
Hard DriveHard DriveHard DriveOptical Drive
Samsung 840 Pro (1) 150GB Western Digital Raptor (1) 1TB Western Digital Black Caviar (1) Samsung SATA DVD Burner 
CoolingOSMonitorKeyboard
Antec Kuhler H2O 620 Windows 8.1 LG 21:9 Ultrawide 34" 3440x1440 Filco 114 key (Blue Cherry) / HHKB Pro 2 
PowerCaseMouseMouse Pad
Corsair HX850W - 850W Mountain Mods - U2 UFO Orginal - Gloss Black Logitech G400 / Razer Deathadder BE Razer Goliathus Extended / Artisan Hien VE (Sof... 
AudioOtherOther
Creative Sounds Blaster X-FI Titanium HD Asus USB N-53 Wireless USB adapter  12 Case Fans 
  hide details  
Reply
ColdCut
(14 items)
 
YetiKube
(19 items)
 
 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
5960x Asus Rampage V Extreme  XFX 295x2 Core Hydro Edition CORSAIR Vengeance LPX 16GB DDR4 2800 
Hard DriveHard DriveHard DriveOptical Drive
Samsung 850 Pro  Samsung 850 EVO Western Digital Black 3TB  LG Bluray Burner 16x 
CoolingOSMonitorPower
H110i GT Windows 8.1 Pro Asus 4k Corsair AX1500i  
CaseAudio
Corsair 900D Stock 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
(1) 2500K ASRock Extreme3 Gen3 GTX 780 Classified Mushkin 996995 DDR3 1600 (2 Sticks) 
Hard DriveHard DriveHard DriveOptical Drive
Samsung 840 Pro (1) 150GB Western Digital Raptor (1) 1TB Western Digital Black Caviar (1) Samsung SATA DVD Burner 
CoolingOSMonitorKeyboard
Antec Kuhler H2O 620 Windows 8.1 LG 21:9 Ultrawide 34" 3440x1440 Filco 114 key (Blue Cherry) / HHKB Pro 2 
PowerCaseMouseMouse Pad
Corsair HX850W - 850W Mountain Mods - U2 UFO Orginal - Gloss Black Logitech G400 / Razer Deathadder BE Razer Goliathus Extended / Artisan Hien VE (Sof... 
AudioOtherOther
Creative Sounds Blaster X-FI Titanium HD Asus USB N-53 Wireless USB adapter  12 Case Fans 
  hide details  
Reply
post #82 of 93
Thread Starter 
The settling business might have something to do with the new metal gates that Intel uses. But for the life of me I can't think of a physical mechanism that would cause this. I'll have to talk to one of my friends who does GPU design for Nvidia.
post #83 of 93
Quote:
Originally Posted by keto View Post
You are confusing vcore with VID. 2 different things. VID is used (mostly?) for offset. Gigabyte doesn't allow LLC with offset in their bios' (at least in mine and others, there may be exceptions?). OT I know, sorry.
Care to explain that the difference is? I'm confused when Intel calls for 1.52 VID, so that's not the same as 1.52 vcore?

I also don't get why anyone would want vroop. I set my LLC so that I'm 1.368 idle and 1.368 - 1.380 loaded. I just don't get why I would want (with stock vdroop) 1.404 idle and 1.368 loaded
Oldie
(15 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
2500K 4.7 GHz P67A-UD4 FirePro V4800 @ 840 MHz Patriot Viper Extreme 
Hard DriveCoolingMonitorPower
OCZ Solid 3 120G NH-D14 Benq M2700HD Antec TruePower 
CaseAudio
HAF 932 Z-5500 
  hide details  
Reply
Oldie
(15 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
2500K 4.7 GHz P67A-UD4 FirePro V4800 @ 840 MHz Patriot Viper Extreme 
Hard DriveCoolingMonitorPower
OCZ Solid 3 120G NH-D14 Benq M2700HD Antec TruePower 
CaseAudio
HAF 932 Z-5500 
  hide details  
Reply
post #84 of 93
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by oicw View Post
Care to explain that the difference is? I'm confused when Intel calls for 1.52 VID, so that's not the same as 1.52 vcore?

I also don't get why anyone would want vroop. I set my LLC so that I'm 1.368 idle and 1.368 - 1.380 loaded. I just don't get why I would want (with stock vdroop) 1.404 idle and 1.368 loaded
VID is a "theoretical" value, whereas Vcore is more or less the actual value.

Also, no one actually wants vDroop. It's just that the side effects of not having vDroop are worse. Look at this link for more info:

http://www.masterslair.com/364/vdroo...op-really-bad/
post #85 of 93
got a quick question when i set my offset to .100 and my stock is 1.25 on stock how come the dang thing goes all the way to 1.52? i dont feel like running that 24/7 also found if i put voltage at 1.475 in bios it idles at 1.496 and load is 1.520 using offset is the only way to have it idle down?
Edited by knoxy_14 - 11/2/11 at 8:34pm
My System
(15 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
I5 2500K AsRock extreme4 p67 GTX 470 SLI 8gb Gskill 
Hard DriveOSMonitorKeyboard
Crucial 128gb,WD black 1tb, Seagate 500gb windows 7 64 bit Enterprise U2311H Razor 
PowerCaseAudioAudio
Antec HCP 1200 Corsair 800D xonar DX M-Audio BX5a 
  hide details  
Reply
My System
(15 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
I5 2500K AsRock extreme4 p67 GTX 470 SLI 8gb Gskill 
Hard DriveOSMonitorKeyboard
Crucial 128gb,WD black 1tb, Seagate 500gb windows 7 64 bit Enterprise U2311H Razor 
PowerCaseAudioAudio
Antec HCP 1200 Corsair 800D xonar DX M-Audio BX5a 
  hide details  
Reply
post #86 of 93
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by knoxy_14 View Post
got a quick question when i set my offset to .100 and my stock is 1.25 on stock how come the dang thing goes all the way to 1.52? i dont feel like running that 24/7 also found if i put voltage at 1.475 in bios it idles at 1.496 and load is 1.520 using offset is the only way to have it idle down?
Yes, you have to use offset, but it's not that hard:

Basically, your voltage is:

Vcore = VID + offset - vdroop.

You can use RealTemp to get your VID. You can minimize your vdroop with one of the BIOS settings (I forget ATM). Then you set your offset to whatever you need it to be. If your vdroop is negative (i.e. vrise), then you have that one setting set too high.

For example, my offset will be somewhere around 0.1, because my VID at 5GHz is 1.3761, and my desired Vcore is 1.47 (though I'm not yet perfectly stable, so we'll see if I stay at that vcore or not).
post #87 of 93
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nick2253 View Post
Yes, you have to use offset, but it's not that hard:

Basically, your voltage is:

Vcore = VID + offset - vdroop.

You can use RealTemp to get your VID. You can minimize your vdroop with one of the BIOS settings (I forget ATM). Then you set your offset to whatever you need it to be. If your vdroop is negative (i.e. vrise), then you have that one setting set too high.

For example, my offset will be somewhere around 0.1, because my VID at 5GHz is 1.3761, and my desired Vcore is 1.47 (though I'm not yet perfectly stable, so we'll see if I stay at that vcore or not).
my VID is 1.38 at 5ghz and i got a .1 offsett and im on level 1 which should be the highest PLL or whatever that is for the vdroop

but it is 1.52 cpu-z max's out at and idk if i should use something like that for 24/7 i do plan on getting ivy when it releases max temp is around 70 depending on how high i have my heater in my house lol
My System
(15 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
I5 2500K AsRock extreme4 p67 GTX 470 SLI 8gb Gskill 
Hard DriveOSMonitorKeyboard
Crucial 128gb,WD black 1tb, Seagate 500gb windows 7 64 bit Enterprise U2311H Razor 
PowerCaseAudioAudio
Antec HCP 1200 Corsair 800D xonar DX M-Audio BX5a 
  hide details  
Reply
My System
(15 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
I5 2500K AsRock extreme4 p67 GTX 470 SLI 8gb Gskill 
Hard DriveOSMonitorKeyboard
Crucial 128gb,WD black 1tb, Seagate 500gb windows 7 64 bit Enterprise U2311H Razor 
PowerCaseAudioAudio
Antec HCP 1200 Corsair 800D xonar DX M-Audio BX5a 
  hide details  
Reply
post #88 of 93
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nick2253 View Post
VID is a "theoretical" value, whereas Vcore is more or less the actual value.

Also, no one actually wants vDroop. It's just that the side effects of not having vDroop are worse. Look at this link for more info:

http://www.masterslair.com/364/vdroo...op-really-bad/
So my origional understanding of VID is correct - it is the preset Vcore in cmos, i.e. the idealized Vcore.

Where as Vcore is what appears in CPUz in Windows. With LLC enabled on my board, this is actually higher than VID.

With LLC at Level 4 and above, the Vdroop would be negative - an increase of voltage under load. So therefore loaded Vcore is much higher than VID.

I still wonder why Intel and board manufacturers don't design things this way by default. Instead, they have Vcore lower than VID, and loaded Vcore lower still. Just doesn't make sense.
Oldie
(15 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
2500K 4.7 GHz P67A-UD4 FirePro V4800 @ 840 MHz Patriot Viper Extreme 
Hard DriveCoolingMonitorPower
OCZ Solid 3 120G NH-D14 Benq M2700HD Antec TruePower 
CaseAudio
HAF 932 Z-5500 
  hide details  
Reply
Oldie
(15 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
2500K 4.7 GHz P67A-UD4 FirePro V4800 @ 840 MHz Patriot Viper Extreme 
Hard DriveCoolingMonitorPower
OCZ Solid 3 120G NH-D14 Benq M2700HD Antec TruePower 
CaseAudio
HAF 932 Z-5500 
  hide details  
Reply
post #89 of 93
Intel has a very specific load-line; maximum vcc decreases as the amount of current is increased. VID is just the starting point, the y-intercept if you will, for the maximum voltage when there is no current. It is not the "idealized vcore" otherwise they would just state; "keep vcc +-xx from VID".
Edited by Dodgson - 11/3/11 at 2:03am
Ma System Brah
(7 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
i5-3570K @ 4.4 GA-Z77X-UD3H MSI GTX 570 OC 8GB DDR3-1866 
Hard DrivePowerCase
Intel X18M G2 160GB Corsair HX620 Antec P280 
  hide details  
Reply
Ma System Brah
(7 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
i5-3570K @ 4.4 GA-Z77X-UD3H MSI GTX 570 OC 8GB DDR3-1866 
Hard DrivePowerCase
Intel X18M G2 160GB Corsair HX620 Antec P280 
  hide details  
Reply
post #90 of 93
Quote:
Originally Posted by Heazy View Post
I have a question... if using "Offset" mode enables your Vcore to be significantly lower, why doesn't everyone do it?

So someone worried about being at 1.42v can just use offset mode and be somewhere around 1.37v

(I'm aware this could be a noobish question)
is there any guide how to understand that function correctly ?
2600K @ 4.7
(13 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
Intel 2600k GA-Z68X-UD3P-B3 Radeon 6970 8GB-1600 
Hard DriveOSMonitorPower
256GB-OCZMI Windows 7-x64 LG 23 Enermax Liberty620W 
Case
HAF932 
  hide details  
Reply
2600K @ 4.7
(13 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
Intel 2600k GA-Z68X-UD3P-B3 Radeon 6970 8GB-1600 
Hard DriveOSMonitorPower
256GB-OCZMI Windows 7-x64 LG 23 Enermax Liberty620W 
Case
HAF932 
  hide details  
Reply
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Intel CPUs
Overclock.net › Forums › Intel › Intel CPUs › Did we ever come a conclusion on safe SB voltages?