Overclock.net › Forums › Intel › Intel CPUs › Aida64 vs Prime95
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Aida64 vs Prime95 - Page 3

post #21 of 73
Thread Starter 
Cool...I will test with the latest version and see how it compares. However, I made it clear in the OP why I ran Prime95 with the settings I did. Some will not agree but there are infinite options and I can't try them all (however I am happy to try other recommend settings as I've not used Prime95 a lot and you guys know it better than me). I used the settings as recommended in the ASRock OC guide because that's what most people will use.

And yeah justanoldman, I was talking with someone in another thread about IBT and will definitely be running it and adding results here

UPDATE: Further testing has been postponed due to error 55 Aida64 has been running for over 2 hours now so I think I'm OK but will keep it running a few more hours to be sure
Edited by tw33k - 5/18/13 at 8:49pm
post #22 of 73
Thread Starter 
Finally got the system up and running so I ran Prime95 27.9 with the settings outlined in the Ivy Bridge Overclocking Guide ► Asus Motherboards thread. It took a slight bump in voltage to get the system stable.



It seems that Prime95 definitely requires more voltage than Aida64 so I wonder if that extra voltage is necessary given that all my systems are stable on the voltage needed for Aida64 not Prime95. My ASUS Maximus Formula V system is my main system, I use it all the time and it never bluescreens/freezes no matter what I'm doing on it (except of course running Prime95)
post #23 of 73
I use Aida64 - its good enough, cant be arsed to have so many progs on my computer. I have a mate who has to have every little toy on his computer and what for most of the time?

If you do a stress test with Aida64 for the most of us - there is not going to be normal usage excelling it as in power draw etc. I prefer the interface and the extras. thumb.gif
post #24 of 73
Thread Starter 
Set LLC and voltage back to how they were originally (see Aida64 settings above) and successfully ran IBT



I didn't expect it to complete. I thought for sure I'd need to raise the voltage.
post #25 of 73
What freq GHz and ram speed was that?
post #26 of 73
Thread Starter 
It's in the OP. 4.7GHz, 2400MHz
post #27 of 73
tw33k why are your GFlops so low? Is HT on? I'm seeing a trend with 3770k and genuinely wondering and looking to understand.
post #28 of 73
Thread Starter 
I'm not concerned about IBT results. I only ran it because someone requested it and I left it at stock settings, see the 1024MB? IBT is so far away from any real world scenario I'm surprised people still think it's relevant as a benchmark tool.

Manually entering the number of threads also helps...


Edited by tw33k - 5/22/13 at 1:36am
post #29 of 73
Try setting the RAM to 14000+, and/or try LinX with the same amount of memory. You won't observe that short 10 second runs anymore, instaed it'll take around 5 minutes per individual run. wink.gif
post #30 of 73
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by spoonium View Post

Try setting the RAM to 14000+, and/or try LinX with the same amount of memory. You won't observe that short 10 second runs anymore, instaed it'll take around 5 minutes per individual run. wink.gif

What's the point tho? How does it relate to the purpose of this thread?
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Intel CPUs
Overclock.net › Forums › Intel › Intel CPUs › Aida64 vs Prime95