Overclock.net › Forums › Intel › Intel CPUs › i7 3820 - 4820 Overclock Club
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

i7 3820 - 4820 Overclock Club - Page 49

post #481 of 6500
Quote:
Originally Posted by SneakyBushNinja View Post

Quote:
Originally Posted by BuildBuildBuild View Post


1) Is it normal for the Core Voltage to have to be set to 1.38v to get a stable 4.625Ghz ?
2) Is it normal for the Core Voltage to fluctuate between 1.38v and 1.41v when manually set to 1.38v and running Intel Burn Test or Prime95?
3) Is it normal for the Max Temp of a core to reach 78 C with 1.38v at full load and my setup (see sig), and 38C when idling ?
4) Is it safe to run the PC at these values, voltages, and temps in the long-term?
This is my first time overclocking anything, so I have no idea if my results are good, bad, or ugly, and I want to make sure the values and results are within the expected norm or not. Thanks everyone![/COLOR][/b]

1) your core voltage is kind of high, but if that's what your chip needs, that's what it needs. If you're concerned, an offset of +0.020 should give you similar max voltage, but will lower itself when not needed.

2) what you're seeing there is a product of your LLC settings (may be called vdroop or load line calibration, or something else of the sort), it's part of the Intel spec and nothing to worry about.
3) that is kind of high, I'm not familiar with your cooler, but 38C at idle and load of 78C is pretty warm.
4) dunno, it might last a week or 20 years. Welcome to the razors edge smile.gif (I'd get the temps down and maybe go for 4.5 with a lower vcore, but you're not in any danger zone)

Also when running IBT you should select a memory size closer to the total amount of memory you have, you'll get temps a couple of degrees hotter

Thanks for your sincere answers, and it's very disappointing to hear after spending over 2,000 Euros to buy a top-of-the-line rig with best-in-class parts. The worst part is that reading through this thread, I can see that a lot of people easily achieved a stable OC of 4.625 Ghz, and with seemingly lower Core V's and Temps.

So my chip requires a higher Core Voltage than it should, and is also getting hotter than it should. That's a one-two punch to my newbie gut and it looks like I got dealt a bad hand in the silicon game on my first try. Real bummer.

Is there anyway to tweak the OC'ing so that I can lower the Core Voltage? After all, what I did to get to 4.625Ghz was very basic.

Also, could it be the motherboard? Would replacing the motherboard make any difference or is it mostly dependent on the CPU?


Quote:
Originally Posted by Ramsey77 View Post

1: Not every chip will be a great overclocker, but 1.38v isn't that bad.

Maybe 1.38v isn't that bad, but it's still bad and that is a let down for me as I was very pumped about delving into the world of OC'ing and this has hurt my motivation after spending so many hours to tweak the damn thing to get it stable only to find out it's requiring a higher voltage and temperate than everyone else.


Quote:
Originally Posted by Ramsey77 View Post

3: Temps are a bit high (especially for that cooler), but you didn't tell us what your ambient temp is or what type of TIM you are using. You could try reseating your cooler, along with trying some different TIM. There are many videos on the Tube for pointers on TIM application.

Yeah, I was recommended this cooler as it was a top-of-the-line non-water cooler, but it's another let-down. I'm assuming by "TIM" you mean the thermal paste, I just used the one from Noctua that came with my fan. I had to switch motherboards because the original one had a faulty temperature sensor, so the CPU already had some of the dried paste on it from a few weeks ago when I put it in the new one. I didn't bother to remove the paste that was stuck on it because I figured re-applying the paste would fill any gaps. I applied a pea-sized amount to it. Ambient temperature is about 21C / 70F, although I should add that when I was running the tests, my computer was/is sitting under a desk where the wall is less than 4 inches from the back of the case, and the top of the table is less than 4 inches from the top of the case. I say that because I know the exhaust on the HAF-X is the back and top fan, so I don't know if that affected the CPU temps.


Quote:
Originally Posted by Ramsey77 View Post

Edit: It would be easier to help you if you were to fill out your complete rig with the rig builder in your profile. It's easier for people to see your goods. biggrin.gif

Thanks, I'll give that a shot.
post #482 of 6500
Quote:
Originally Posted by BuildBuildBuild View Post

so the CPU already had some of the dried paste on it from a few weeks ago when I put it in the new one. I didn't bother to remove the paste that was stuck on it because I figured re-applying the paste would fill any gaps.

^^^^^ NO.

Remove cooler, clean chip/base of cooler with Isopropyl Alcohol, and start over. ALWAYS clean old before reapplying. I bet your Temp drops by 5-10 degrees with a fresh install. Worth a shot. And seriously, don't be bummed about your chip man. You are getting a great clock (a 1Ghz OC is NOTHING to sneeze at). If we can get your temps down a bit, you'll be golden. Don't get discouraged, you are doing really well. thumb.gif

Edit: You may be starving your case of air flow by putting it where you are. Try setting it out in the open. I have a little desk that I built for mine that sits right next to my main desk. We will get the temps figured out. biggrin.gif
Edited by Ramsey77 - 4/19/12 at 10:51am
 
Resurrection
(11 items)
 
 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
Intel i7 3820 @4.75 Asus Rampage IV Gene X79 EVGA GTX 670 FTW Signature 2 16Gb GSkill Ripjaw X 1600 @1666 
Hard DriveHard DriveHard DriveOptical Drive
Crucial M4 128Gb Seagate Barracuda ST1000DM003  Mushkin Chronos Enhanced Deluxe 60Gb Samsung BluRay drive 
CoolingOSMonitorKeyboard
Xigmatek Dark Knight 2 Nighthawk Edition Windows 7 Home Premium 64Bit Asus PA248Q Ideazon Merc Stealth 
PowerCaseMouseMouse Pad
Corsair AX-750 Coolermaster HAF Xb Mionix Naos 8200 X Trac Ripper XXL 
AudioOtherOther
Creative Labs Titanium Pro to Pioneer Amp Lamptron FC5V2 Fan Controller KLH 3-way 8-inch Bookshelves / Sennheiser HD-555 
CPUGraphicsHard DriveMonitor
Intel i7-4930K EVGA GTX 780 Crucial M500 960Gb Asus PB278Q 
  hide details  
Reply
 
Resurrection
(11 items)
 
 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
Intel i7 3820 @4.75 Asus Rampage IV Gene X79 EVGA GTX 670 FTW Signature 2 16Gb GSkill Ripjaw X 1600 @1666 
Hard DriveHard DriveHard DriveOptical Drive
Crucial M4 128Gb Seagate Barracuda ST1000DM003  Mushkin Chronos Enhanced Deluxe 60Gb Samsung BluRay drive 
CoolingOSMonitorKeyboard
Xigmatek Dark Knight 2 Nighthawk Edition Windows 7 Home Premium 64Bit Asus PA248Q Ideazon Merc Stealth 
PowerCaseMouseMouse Pad
Corsair AX-750 Coolermaster HAF Xb Mionix Naos 8200 X Trac Ripper XXL 
AudioOtherOther
Creative Labs Titanium Pro to Pioneer Amp Lamptron FC5V2 Fan Controller KLH 3-way 8-inch Bookshelves / Sennheiser HD-555 
CPUGraphicsHard DriveMonitor
Intel i7-4930K EVGA GTX 780 Crucial M500 960Gb Asus PB278Q 
  hide details  
Reply
post #483 of 6500
Quote:
Originally Posted by BuildBuildBuild View Post

Quote:
Originally Posted by SneakyBushNinja View Post

Quote:
Originally Posted by BuildBuildBuild View Post

Maybe 1.38v isn't that bad, but it's still bad and that is a let down for me as I was very pumped about delving into the world of OC'ing and this has hurt my motivation after spending so many hours to tweak the damn thing to get it stable only to find out it's requiring a higher voltage and temperate than everyone else.

You must think my 1.42v is awful then. Personally I couldn't give a ***** anymore. The more I read the more I'm starting to think getting the lowest possible Vcore is a bit of a sacred cow. According to Intel it would take a chip 7 years running at 1.4 volts 24 hours a day 7 days a week to die. I dunno about you but I aint planning on keeping my chip that long or running my PC non-stop either.

Also, some people assume CPU degredation is ONLY due to Vcore (or they ignore other volt changes they are making forgetting that they all will affect degradation.

Here's an interesting piece about vcore and degradation from AnandTech...
Quote:
The Truth About Processor "Degradation"

Degradation - the process by which a CPU loses the ability to maintain an equivalent overclock, often sustainable through the use of increased core voltage levels - is usually regarded as a form of ongoing failure. This is much like saying your life is nothing more than your continual march towards death. While some might find this analogy rather poignant philosophically speaking, technically speaking it's a horrible way of modeling the life-cycle of a CPU. Consider this: silicon quality is often measured as a CPU's ability to reach and maintain a desired stable switching frequency all while requiring no more than the maximum specified process voltage (plus margin). If the voltage required to reach those speeds is a function of the CPU's remaining useful life, then why would each processor come with the same three-year warranty?

The answer is quite simple really. Each processor, regardless of silicon quality, is capable of sustained error-free operation while functioning within the bounds of the specified environmental tolerances (temperature, voltage, etc.), for a period of no less than the warranted lifetime when no more performance is demanded of it than its rated frequency will allow. In other words, rather than limit the useful lifetime of each processor, and to allow for a consistent warranty policy, processors are binned based on the highest achievable speed while applying no more than the process's maximum allowable voltage. When we get right down to it, this is the key to overclocking - running CPUs in excess of their rated specifications regardless of reliability guidelines.

As soon as you concede that overclocking by definition reduces the useful lifetime of any CPU, it becomes easier to justify its more extreme application. It also goes a long way to understanding why Intel has a strict "no overclocking" policy when it comes to retaining the product warranty. Too many people believe overclocking is "safe" as long as they don't increase their processor core voltage - not true. Frequency increases drive higher load temperatures, which reduces useful life. Conversely, better cooling may be a sound investment for those that are looking for longer, unfailing operation as this should provide more positive margin for an extended period of time.
post #484 of 6500
1.35 to 1.38 is completely normal for 4.625. Remove the old tim and reapply. The dh14 paste is a awesome tim as well. Just clean both surfaces thoroughly with alcohol as stated and reapply a pea sized amount. If that doesn't help temps then there is a airflow problem in your case. What are your idle temps btw? Mine range from 27-31*
post #485 of 6500
I agree with everyone else, cleaning the processor and reapplying thermal paste will do you a world of good, and that your voltage isn't out of line for the clock speed. Keep tweaking with it and keep it wherever you're comfortable with (keep your core temps under 80 though).

Give this a couple of reads as well:

http://www.overclock.net/t/1189242/sandy-bridge-e-overclocking-guide-walk-through-explanations-and-support-for-all-x79-overclockers

Tonnes of great info in there.
Wheatley
(12 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsGraphics
Intel i7 4820 Asus Rampage IV Extreme Asus DirectCUII HD 7970 Asus DirectCUII HD 7970 
RAMHard DriveOptical DriveCooling
GSkill RipJaws 2400mhz Intell 6G SSD BluRay burner Corsair H100 Closed loop liquid cooling 
OSMonitorPowerCase
Win7 SP1 Pro x64 Dell u3011 x 3 XFX 1250W NZXT Phantom 
  hide details  
Reply
Wheatley
(12 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsGraphics
Intel i7 4820 Asus Rampage IV Extreme Asus DirectCUII HD 7970 Asus DirectCUII HD 7970 
RAMHard DriveOptical DriveCooling
GSkill RipJaws 2400mhz Intell 6G SSD BluRay burner Corsair H100 Closed loop liquid cooling 
OSMonitorPowerCase
Win7 SP1 Pro x64 Dell u3011 x 3 XFX 1250W NZXT Phantom 
  hide details  
Reply
post #486 of 6500
So did you try re-seating your cooler?
 
Resurrection
(11 items)
 
 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
Intel i7 3820 @4.75 Asus Rampage IV Gene X79 EVGA GTX 670 FTW Signature 2 16Gb GSkill Ripjaw X 1600 @1666 
Hard DriveHard DriveHard DriveOptical Drive
Crucial M4 128Gb Seagate Barracuda ST1000DM003  Mushkin Chronos Enhanced Deluxe 60Gb Samsung BluRay drive 
CoolingOSMonitorKeyboard
Xigmatek Dark Knight 2 Nighthawk Edition Windows 7 Home Premium 64Bit Asus PA248Q Ideazon Merc Stealth 
PowerCaseMouseMouse Pad
Corsair AX-750 Coolermaster HAF Xb Mionix Naos 8200 X Trac Ripper XXL 
AudioOtherOther
Creative Labs Titanium Pro to Pioneer Amp Lamptron FC5V2 Fan Controller KLH 3-way 8-inch Bookshelves / Sennheiser HD-555 
CPUGraphicsHard DriveMonitor
Intel i7-4930K EVGA GTX 780 Crucial M500 960Gb Asus PB278Q 
  hide details  
Reply
 
Resurrection
(11 items)
 
 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
Intel i7 3820 @4.75 Asus Rampage IV Gene X79 EVGA GTX 670 FTW Signature 2 16Gb GSkill Ripjaw X 1600 @1666 
Hard DriveHard DriveHard DriveOptical Drive
Crucial M4 128Gb Seagate Barracuda ST1000DM003  Mushkin Chronos Enhanced Deluxe 60Gb Samsung BluRay drive 
CoolingOSMonitorKeyboard
Xigmatek Dark Knight 2 Nighthawk Edition Windows 7 Home Premium 64Bit Asus PA248Q Ideazon Merc Stealth 
PowerCaseMouseMouse Pad
Corsair AX-750 Coolermaster HAF Xb Mionix Naos 8200 X Trac Ripper XXL 
AudioOtherOther
Creative Labs Titanium Pro to Pioneer Amp Lamptron FC5V2 Fan Controller KLH 3-way 8-inch Bookshelves / Sennheiser HD-555 
CPUGraphicsHard DriveMonitor
Intel i7-4930K EVGA GTX 780 Crucial M500 960Gb Asus PB278Q 
  hide details  
Reply
post #487 of 6500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ramsey77 View Post

So did you try re-seating your cooler?

Not yet because now I'm starting to think it could be my Motherboard that is causing all of this. When you guys told me my Temps were high, I wanted to compare the Temps of the current Motherboard to the same exact Motherboard I had exchanged a week after buying all the parts (due to a faulty temp sensor) since I had screenshots from benchmarking it that I could compare the current one to.

Well, here is where things get really strange. The previous Motherboard was tested with the FACTORY defaults + XMP @ 1600 Mhz. For some reason, the Factory defaulted to 3.700 Ghz out-of-the-box. To replicate that on the current Motherboard, the best I could do was reset to the OPTIMIZED defaults (for some silly reason ASUS doesn't give you the option to reset to the FACTORY defaults), XMP @ 1600 Mhz, and Multiplier at 37 to get the same 3.700 Ghz (since resetting to OPTIMIZED defaults sets the Multiplier automatically to 38X).

Well, when I did that, the current Motherboard FAILED Prime95 in under 10 minutes. WHAT?? My thoughts exactly, how could this top-of-the-line system not handle a 0.100 Ghz overclock?

I still let Prime95 run for over 2 hours to compare Temps, and the Temps were actually quite similar, but I noticed something immediately: the Core Voltages were different! The current Motherboard was feeding the CPU less voltage @ 3.700 Ghz than the previous Motherboard at the same clock (1.248v vs. 1.256v), which is probably why the current one failed at PRIME95 even with just a 0.100 Ghz overclock. If I recall correctly, the Factory Default and the Optimized Default both default to a Core Voltage of "Offset + Auto", so could it be that the Voltage regulator of the current motherboard is faulty and that's what's making my overclocking so difficult?

I'll let you guys be the judge as I'm completely out of my depth here, but below are the screenshots of the results with the original Motherboard vs. the current Motherboard (remember, they are the EXACT same model):

ORIGINAL P9X79 DELUXE (FACTORY DEFAULTS + XMP @ 1600 MHZ) AFTER OVER 2 HOURS OF PRIME95:

339


CURRENT P9X79 DELUXE (OPTIMIZED DEFAULTS + XMP @ 1600 MHZ + 37X MULTIPLIER) AFTER OVER 2 HOURS OF PRIME95:

395


For the sake of thoroughness (since I have it), here is the ORIGINAL P9X79 DELUXE (FACTORY DEFAULTS + XMP @ 1600 MHZ) AFTER OVER 10 HOURS OF PRIME95:

340


I'm no expert, but I just can't fathom how such an expensive build could fail a 0.100 Ghz OC so easily other than some part being faulty. Any ideas? If I need to exchange the Motherboard again, I can easily do it and have no problem doing so, especially if it's faulty in any way.

Please let me know. Thanks.
Edited by BuildBuildBuild - 4/20/12 at 3:53am
post #488 of 6500
Quote:
Originally Posted by BuildBuildBuild View Post

Not yet because now I'm starting to think it could be my Motherboard that is causing all of this. When you guys told me my Temps were high, I wanted to compare the Temps of the current Motherboard to the same exact Motherboard I had exchanged a week after buying all the parts (due to a faulty temp sensor) since I had screenshots from benchmarking it that I could compare the current one to.
Well, here is where things get really strange. The previous Motherboard was tested with the FACTORY defaults + XMP @ 1600 Mhz. For some reason, the Factory defaulted to 3.700 Ghz out-of-the-box. To replicate that on the current Motherboard, the best I could do was reset to the OPTIMIZED defaults (for some silly reason ASUS doesn't give you the option to reset to the FACTORY defaults), XMP @ 1600 Mhz, and Multiplier at 37 to get the same 3.700 Ghz (since resetting to OPTIMIZED defaults sets the Multiplier automatically to 38X).
Well, when I did that, the current Motherboard FAILED Prime95 in under 10 minutes. WHAT?? My thoughts exactly, how could this top-of-the-line system not handle a 0.100 Ghz overclock?
I still let Prime95 run for over 2 hours to compare Temps, and the Temps were actually quite similar, but I noticed something immediately: the Core Voltages were different! The current Motherboard was feeding the CPU less voltage @ 3.700 Ghz than the previous Motherboard at the same clock (1.248v vs. 1.256v), which is probably why the current one failed at PRIME95 even with just a 0.100 Ghz overclock. If I recall correctly, the Factory Default and the Optimized Default both default to a Core Voltage of "Offset + Auto", so could it be that the Voltage regulator of the current motherboard is faulty and that's what's making my overclocking so difficult?
I'll let you guys be the judge as I'm completely out of my depth here, but below are the screenshots of the results with the original Motherboard vs. the current Motherboard (remember, they are the EXACT same model):
ORIGINAL P9X79 DELUXE (FACTORY DEFAULTS + XMP @ 1600 MHZ) AFTER OVER 2 HOURS OF PRIME95:
339
CURRENT P9X79 DELUXE (OPTIMIZED DEFAULTS + XMP @ 1600 MHZ + 37X MULTIPLIER) AFTER OVER 2 HOURS OF PRIME95:
395
For the sake of thoroughness (since I have it), here is the ORIGINAL P9X79 DELUXE (FACTORY DEFAULTS + XMP @ 1600 MHZ) AFTER OVER 10 HOURS OF PRIME95:
340
I'm no expert, but I just can't fathom how such an expensive build could fail a 0.100 Ghz OC so easily other than some part being faulty. Any ideas? If I need to exchange the Motherboard again, I can easily do it and have no problem doing so, especially if it's faulty in any way.
Please let me know. Thanks.

Those temps all look pretty normal, regardless of the issue at hand, reseat your cooler smile.gif .

As for your failing worker, that's a bit odd that it would fail on the optimized defaults (I think those are the factory defaults btw), but the auto settings can be kind of dumb some times. I'd try leaving the BCLK at 100 and setting the multiplier to 43 with a vcore of offset - .020 and see if that works, if not -.010 should cut it. Then take it from there. 3.7 Ghz is the turbo frequency if I recall correctly, so it's not actually an overclock at all, it should certainly be stable at that clock and I haven't heard of a 3820 that couldn't get up to 4.3 with ease.
Wheatley
(12 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsGraphics
Intel i7 4820 Asus Rampage IV Extreme Asus DirectCUII HD 7970 Asus DirectCUII HD 7970 
RAMHard DriveOptical DriveCooling
GSkill RipJaws 2400mhz Intell 6G SSD BluRay burner Corsair H100 Closed loop liquid cooling 
OSMonitorPowerCase
Win7 SP1 Pro x64 Dell u3011 x 3 XFX 1250W NZXT Phantom 
  hide details  
Reply
Wheatley
(12 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsGraphics
Intel i7 4820 Asus Rampage IV Extreme Asus DirectCUII HD 7970 Asus DirectCUII HD 7970 
RAMHard DriveOptical DriveCooling
GSkill RipJaws 2400mhz Intell 6G SSD BluRay burner Corsair H100 Closed loop liquid cooling 
OSMonitorPowerCase
Win7 SP1 Pro x64 Dell u3011 x 3 XFX 1250W NZXT Phantom 
  hide details  
Reply
post #489 of 6500
People here keep telling you to re-seat your cooler, and you seem to be ignoring our advice. Why don't you try it, before doing something drastic like RMA'ing your board? mad.gif
 
Resurrection
(11 items)
 
 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
Intel i7 3820 @4.75 Asus Rampage IV Gene X79 EVGA GTX 670 FTW Signature 2 16Gb GSkill Ripjaw X 1600 @1666 
Hard DriveHard DriveHard DriveOptical Drive
Crucial M4 128Gb Seagate Barracuda ST1000DM003  Mushkin Chronos Enhanced Deluxe 60Gb Samsung BluRay drive 
CoolingOSMonitorKeyboard
Xigmatek Dark Knight 2 Nighthawk Edition Windows 7 Home Premium 64Bit Asus PA248Q Ideazon Merc Stealth 
PowerCaseMouseMouse Pad
Corsair AX-750 Coolermaster HAF Xb Mionix Naos 8200 X Trac Ripper XXL 
AudioOtherOther
Creative Labs Titanium Pro to Pioneer Amp Lamptron FC5V2 Fan Controller KLH 3-way 8-inch Bookshelves / Sennheiser HD-555 
CPUGraphicsHard DriveMonitor
Intel i7-4930K EVGA GTX 780 Crucial M500 960Gb Asus PB278Q 
  hide details  
Reply
 
Resurrection
(11 items)
 
 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
Intel i7 3820 @4.75 Asus Rampage IV Gene X79 EVGA GTX 670 FTW Signature 2 16Gb GSkill Ripjaw X 1600 @1666 
Hard DriveHard DriveHard DriveOptical Drive
Crucial M4 128Gb Seagate Barracuda ST1000DM003  Mushkin Chronos Enhanced Deluxe 60Gb Samsung BluRay drive 
CoolingOSMonitorKeyboard
Xigmatek Dark Knight 2 Nighthawk Edition Windows 7 Home Premium 64Bit Asus PA248Q Ideazon Merc Stealth 
PowerCaseMouseMouse Pad
Corsair AX-750 Coolermaster HAF Xb Mionix Naos 8200 X Trac Ripper XXL 
AudioOtherOther
Creative Labs Titanium Pro to Pioneer Amp Lamptron FC5V2 Fan Controller KLH 3-way 8-inch Bookshelves / Sennheiser HD-555 
CPUGraphicsHard DriveMonitor
Intel i7-4930K EVGA GTX 780 Crucial M500 960Gb Asus PB278Q 
  hide details  
Reply
post #490 of 6500
Quote:
Originally Posted by SneakyBushNinja View Post

As for your failing worker, that's a bit odd that it would fail on the optimized defaults (I think those are the factory defaults btw)

I found it very odd as well, that's why I wanted to post the results for you guys to check out. But I don't think the Factory Defaults are the same as the Optimized Defaults because when I first built the PC and before I touched anything in the BIOS, my CPU was running at 3.7Ghz, but after I reset to the Optimized Defaults, it was running at 3.8Ghz, so something was definitely different.

Quote:
Originally Posted by SneakyBushNinja View Post

the auto settings can be kind of dumb some times.

But is that normal on a 300+ Euro board? It's a bit frustrating to spend so much money on something and not have it work correctly as intended.

Quote:
Originally Posted by SneakyBushNinja View Post


I'd try leaving the BCLK at 100 and setting the multiplier to 43 with a vcore of offset - .020 and see if that works, if not -.010 should cut it. Then take it from there.

Thanks, I'll try that tomorrow and will test for stability. I just saw that others were running BCLK 100 / 43X Multi with the Core Voltage on "auto"


Quote:
Originally Posted by SneakyBushNinja View Post

3.7 Ghz is the turbo frequency if I recall correctly, so it's not actually an overclock at all, it should certainly be stable at that clock and I haven't heard of a 3820 that couldn't get up to 4.3 with ease.

Yeah, that's what concerns me since mine failed at both 3.7 Ghz and 4.3 Ghz, and I'm not sure what the fan has to do with it because if you look at the two screenshots, there is only about a 1 degree temperature difference.


Quote:
Originally Posted by Ramsey77 View Post

People here keep telling you to re-seat your cooler, and you seem to be ignoring our advice. Why don't you try it, before doing something drastic like RMA'ing your board? mad.gif

I'm definitely not ignoring your advice, it's just that this was the first time I've built a PC and it took me literally 7 hours to build it, so for me re-seating the cooler is not an easy task, and if in the end my Motherboard is faulty, I'm going to have to re-seat it anyway, so I'm first trying to eliminate the Motherboard as a cause so that I don't have to re-seat it twice. If you look at the screenshots I posted before, there is only a 1 degree temperature difference between the original Motherboard (where the Fan was seated perfectly for the first time) and the current Motherboard (where I did not remove the old paste on the CPU when installing the same Fan). So although I'm no expert, I honestly don't see how a 1 degree Temperature difference can be the root cause of all my OC troubles, so I'm just trying to get some expert opinion on whether the problem may lie elsewhere since my experience so far has been quite different to everyone's in this thread. That's all.


All that said, no one has really confirmed whether the Motherboard could be the cause of these issues or not. If it can't, then I won't mention it again, I just found the difference between the original motherboard and the current one quite strange since they are the same exact model. But if it is the cause, then I can easily exchange it because it's still within the 30-day exchange window so I wouldn't need to RMA it to get a new one, so keep that in mind.

Thanks, I really appreciate everyone's assistance.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Intel CPUs
Overclock.net › Forums › Intel › Intel CPUs › i7 3820 - 4820 Overclock Club