Originally Posted by mus1mus
I'm not taking that on your part. But you are also wrong to assume the rest of the UD3 revisions were of the level of your 1.1 or 1. It has been long proven on the rev 3, rev 4.
Doesn't matter how much CPUNB Voltage I add or shave. The thing is hotter (on the Giga) because of the overshoots and unpredictable Voltage Swings.
There is a whole lot more that goes into it than you let on, but one of the biggest problems some new members have is CPU/NB seriously overvolts when left on "Auto" on ASUS board. Particularly the saber. This leads them to believe they are thermally limited when they could chop a whole 0.15v(!) off the CPU/NB and reduce a ton of heat.
Mind you, 0.06+ Volts From minimum to Maximum matters a lot on both Stability and Temps.
You wouldn't know, you never have dreaded the board.
Revisions on Giga boards are also very important. Rev 1.1 was absolutely fantastic, and I have 4 boards from that generation (two 970 and two 990 UD3s). Rev 4 appears to have fixed several of Rev 3's problems, but yet again I'm now sitting on a Rev 3 UD5, bypassing most of the problems people say the Rev 3 series has, which leads me to believe that most people simply don't really know how to overclock. Which is completely unsurprising, we get new people all the time.
Revision 3 UD3 has long been known to have too many issues for Overclocking. And reading from the GIGA thread, it seems the issues UD3 have still exist. There has been numerous people with the revision 4 who seek help from that thread. And the common consensus, picking a better board.
While true that some users were simply not up for the OC'ing challenge, they are also limited by the board.
And yeah, I'm referring to just one rev. And maybe the other one that supposedly improve on it's shortcomings, I'm no way turning this out to favor the board that I currently have. Just pointing the variable that limits Overclocking to the user.
This is not a fan boy rant.
And no Flat isn't necessary. If you know what you're doing, vBoost can actually help.
It could work 2 ways.
Higher Voltage - More stable at a given clock within cooler capabilities.
Higher Voltage - More heat at a given clock compared to other boards with finer Voltage Increments.
The point on the latter is, Lower Giga models cannot or does not have the fine voltage offsets as the other boards.
I would love to make a proper comparison of my UD3 rev 3 and the Kitty's Voltages response if only my UD3 is not dead.
First off, all that shows is you (or others, whoever) don't know how to control your board. Ask @cssorkinman
, any amount of voltage swing can be accounted for. I really do not care what people whine about in the motherboard threads because 9 times out of 10 it's the same as a newbie entering here; people complaining about how it doesn't work how it "should" in their mind instead of learning how to do it the right way. It wasn't too long ago that people didn't know how to save BIOS settings and have them apply on reboot on Rev 3s.
You want to know real
pain? Ask the few people that have tried to use 78LMT boards. *shiver*
The thing about vBoost however, especially on Rev 1.1, is that it could save you some idle voltage if you do it right. Back when I was using that board I had LLC set in such a way that at idle I was at (for 4.8Ghz) 1.45v, but under load it would rise to 1.475v. System was completely stable. It also allowed for some very funny CPU-z Valids.
As for fine voltage control... 0.01v is not going to make a huge difference. Ever. If that tiny amount of voltage is what's stopping you thermally, then your cooler can not handle it. Back off the clock.
Which by the way, the ASUS CPU/NB problem was directed at everyone thinking coolers are not as capable as they are. A large number of people coming into this thread enter with ASUS boards, low clocks, and high temps. Actually doing CPU/NB manually would help them, but everyone seems to have forgotten about this and just tells them to get a new cooler.
Originally Posted by mus1mus
Originally Posted by Krusher33
Sad day. It's the chip. The Athlon worked. Tried the 8350 again and it didn't.
Good news is that the drives seems to work even though they had the bulk of the water dumped on them. Both the 280X's works too.
It's just the chip. I've never RMA'd a CPU before.
EDIT: Just now submitted a Warranty Request form. Let's see how it goes and hope for the best. I was not pleased with it OC anyways.
You should call yourself lucky ( a bit inappropriate to your current situation but YES, you are )
In most cases, a spill would either kill a Mobo, or a chip, worst and a very possible to kill both.
I'm hoping you can get around the hassle quickly. I've been there a month ago. My board just died.
Should have RMA'd it if you didn't. Giga's RMA process is no where near as nightmarish as all the ASUS RMA stories in the Rant section, and worse case it can be a backup/test board. Best case you can sell it off.
My turn around time was 2 weeks including shipping both ways when I killed my old UD3 with water.
Originally Posted by Krusher33
Yeah I am quite lucky. I was just thinking of what I've RMA'd in the past and... I think nothing? There was a motherboard that I called in about where a PCIe slot went bad, but it was way beyond its warranty so no go on that one. And then there was an SSD that I bought used. I tried to RMA it but needed a receipt. When I asked the seller for it, he just offered a refund for it. Seemed suspicious to me but whatever, I got my money back.
And people have had problems with OCZ RAMs and SSD's, Seagate's HDD's, but not me.
So yeah... I think this is my very first RMA in the 15+ years I've built PC's.
It's like waiting in the DMV. It takes forever, but it needs to be done.
Or you can just go buy a new one if you're good on the money front and decide what to do with the RMA'd chip later.Edited by KyadCK - 5/14/14 at 9:56pm