Overclock.net › Forums › Intel › Intel Motherboards › THE Asus Rampage Formula/Maximus Formula/P5E Deluxe/P5E Thread
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

THE Asus Rampage Formula/Maximus Formula/P5E Deluxe/P5E Thread - Page 102

post #1011 of 2014
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by genetix View Post
( Recommended setting to 9 or 10? hell anything above 7 is bad enough.. I hope manual could reach 6 on 1066Mhz, but only EPP profile usage reaches 6 for some reason otherwise it won't post. )...

...(Although your Q6700 is so incredible core considering the OC's on Q6600 G0 cores I've seen that should go over 4Ghz ""with eas.."")...

O and fail to mention..

0205 P5E-Deluxe BIOS Performance level = BIOS != Performance Level... Test it on 6-7 and you will see your performance level is not 6-7..
I dont know anyone with a Q6600 G0 core who has gotten over 4.0GHz with ease, so I'm confused about your comment.


The 9 or 10 setting is recommended while finding the CPU max overclock. The chipset will not operate at certain FSB speeds matched with an unusable tRD that is too low. So to take that out of the equation, you set to 9 or 10 (as recommended), then after the CPU and FSB speed is dialled in, you bring it back down... This follows the same train of thought of setting my Q6700 Multi to 7x to find the highest FSB. So I wouldnt actually keep it at 7x, I would bring it back up

Anandtech: ASUS ROG Rampage Formula: Why we were wrong about the Intel X48
Quote:
The Rules of Working with tRD: What's Allowed and What Isn't

We mentioned earlier that there are a few rules pertaining to the modification of the default tRD value for a particular memory subsystem configuration. These rules are actually more of a set of equations that we have derived in order to assist the user in pre-determining whether or not a system will POST and operate given the settings in question. They can also be used to explain after the fact why certain configurations refuse to function.

In actuality, there is only one requirement that must be satisfied when setting tRD: The MCH must have a minimum amount of time to complete the clock crossing procedure for each data bit translated from one clocking domain to the other. We have shown the equation below for those that care to know. Unfortunately it does not lend itself well to being solved as the input variables ("t0" and "tckxss") are not readily obtainable.
How to Choose an Appropriate Memory Configuration
Edited by ericeod - 10/5/08 at 10:13am
My System
(16 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
6850K ASUS X99-AII eVGA GTX 1060 32Gb Team Vulcan DDR4 3000 Cas 15 
Hard DriveHard DriveHard DriveHard Drive
Samsung 960 EVO NVME Crucial M500 Seagate HDD Samsung F3 
CoolingOSMonitorKeyboard
H100i Windows 10 Pro 64 Samsung KU6300 40" Corsair K70 Vengeance 
PowerCaseMouse
Seasonic Gold 750W Phantek Enthoo Pro M Logitech G9X 
  hide details  
Reply
My System
(16 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
6850K ASUS X99-AII eVGA GTX 1060 32Gb Team Vulcan DDR4 3000 Cas 15 
Hard DriveHard DriveHard DriveHard Drive
Samsung 960 EVO NVME Crucial M500 Seagate HDD Samsung F3 
CoolingOSMonitorKeyboard
H100i Windows 10 Pro 64 Samsung KU6300 40" Corsair K70 Vengeance 
PowerCaseMouse
Seasonic Gold 750W Phantek Enthoo Pro M Logitech G9X 
  hide details  
Reply

Gear mentioned in this thread:

post #1012 of 2014
I flashed to the Deluxe 0205, setup my 24x7, 9x460 ram at 4:3, 1226 5-5-5-15-3-45 tRD 6, no post. Tried a tRD of 6,7,8,9,10 and Twister Light & Moderate, even added a little more CPU & NB voltage, never a post, flashed back to 0903. I wanted to use it because of the way the Transaction Booster works. My ram is not well liked by x38 boards, so add another to the dislike column.

As for FSB, when I was using a Q6700, 460-470 was my limit, this was the same with P5E0903 and RF0403 and four sticks of ram but I didn't push the voltages. With the E8500 I've posted at 533 but no Windows.
This is my best CPU Clock, http://valid.x86-secret.com/show_oc.php?id=426766
This is my best FSB, http://valid.x86-secret.com/show_oc.php?id=427024
No test for stability, ran Everest, CPU-Z and Memset, just seeing how far I could go.
Edited by Aleslammer - 10/5/08 at 2:03pm
Toys
(12 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
Athlon 64 3300+ EVGA 115-K8-NF31 Radeon 9550 G. Skill DDR 400 
OSCase
Windows XP SP3 On the Bench 
  hide details  
Reply
Toys
(12 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
Athlon 64 3300+ EVGA 115-K8-NF31 Radeon 9550 G. Skill DDR 400 
OSCase
Windows XP SP3 On the Bench 
  hide details  
Reply
post #1013 of 2014
Quote:
Originally Posted by ericeod View Post
The 9 or 10 setting is recommended while finding the CPU max overclock. The chipset will not operate at certain FSB speeds matched with an unusable tRD that is too low. So to take that out of the equation, you set to 9 or 10 (as recommended), then after the CPU and FSB speed is dialled in, you bring it back down... This follows the same train of thought of setting my Q6700 Multi to 7x to find the highest FSB. So I wouldnt actually keep it at 7x, I would bring it back up
would be incorrect. yes you have to lower it, but after you get FSB OC'd up you will have to get tRD correct also to boost up ram and the value you should know by now is 7 not 9 or 10... If I would do this I would actually relax/disable the boost would be ideal for OC..

and multipliear of Q6x00 cores as far I know is 9x.. that is 450Mhz higher than Q9450 in any case. the 4Ghz should go broken with very easy actually with 450FSB = 4050Mhz. there is no reason what so ever to drop multiplier down since you cannot reach such FSB's like 533Mhz with these boards and the 450FSB should be very stable as I et stable 465FSB on Q9450 8 hours save REAL stressing something like Everest and not like ORTHOS or Prime which doesn't prove a thing in the end as you need FULL stress not 35% per cores. So I have to disagree with many also benchmarking with these tools.

So, I have to disagree with you here quite a lot of things.

--edit--

Just had to come back.. I just was reading that 'Anandtech' topic and I disagree with them too. Their calculations are simply wrong. 400Mhz 1:1 800Mhz tRD = 7 not 6 by any DDR2 memory same with 450 and 1080.. and what the actual is 900Mhz DDR2 on 450FSB there's the only true value as far I can see on that table and probably 7 in that wouldn't be stable anylonger so that would actually also be false and be +1 as in 8.
Edited by genetix - 10/5/08 at 7:17pm
OT
(14 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
I7-4820K Gigabyte GA-X79-UP4 AMD Radeon R9 290 ADATA 1866+ 
Hard DriveCoolingOSMonitor
Kingston HyperX 3K Corsair H80i/H110 + LN2 7 x64 42' 
KeyboardPowerCaseMouse
RAZER Lycosa Corsair AX760 modular platinum Lian-li / Corsair Carbide R500 Logitech R525 
  hide details  
Reply
OT
(14 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
I7-4820K Gigabyte GA-X79-UP4 AMD Radeon R9 290 ADATA 1866+ 
Hard DriveCoolingOSMonitor
Kingston HyperX 3K Corsair H80i/H110 + LN2 7 x64 42' 
KeyboardPowerCaseMouse
RAZER Lycosa Corsair AX760 modular platinum Lian-li / Corsair Carbide R500 Logitech R525 
  hide details  
Reply
post #1014 of 2014
Quote:
Originally Posted by genetix View Post

and multipliear of Q6x00 cores as far I know is 9x.. that is 450Mhz higher than Q9450 in any case. the 4Ghz should go broken with very easy actually with 450FSB = 4050Mhz. there is no reason what so ever to drop multiplier down since you cannot reach such FSB's like 533Mhz with these boards and the 450FSB should be very stable as I et stable 465FSB on Q9450 8 hours save REAL stressing something like Everest and not like ORTHOS or Prime which doesn't prove a thing in the end as you need FULL stress not 35% per cores. So I have to disagree with many also benchmarking with these tools.

So, I have to disagree with you here quite a lot of things.
Just because a high multiplier is in place does not mean squat as far as if the CPU can break the 4GHz barrier. There are many G0s which simply cannot reach it even with insane voltage.

Lowing the multiplier to push FSB can be a plus. It can allow you to run your RAM at different speeds as well as increases your "rated FSB". In my case there has been various benchmarks by other users which run 450*8 and have shown increased performance in comparison to 400*9.


Stress testing with ORTHOS is a no-no with a Quad. Unless you run two instances which for the most part still does not work too well you will never max out 100% usage on all 4 cores.

The latest or at least later versions of PRIME95 work well with quad cores. The options of Small FFT to really stress the CPU and see the max temps or just the normal Blend work well. Small FFT usually maxes the cores within seconds while the Blend in Vista tends to take a few moments.
mITX
(11 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
Intel Core i7 4770K ASRock Z97E-ITX/ac ASUS GeForce GTX 970 Crucial 8GB (4GB x 2) 
Hard DriveHard DriveOptical DriveCooling
SanDisk Extreme II - 240GB Western Digital RAID0 - 1TB LITE-ON iHAS124 CORSAIR Hydro H100i 
OSPowerCase
Windows 10 Pro Corsair TX750 Corsair Obsidian 250D 
  hide details  
Reply
mITX
(11 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
Intel Core i7 4770K ASRock Z97E-ITX/ac ASUS GeForce GTX 970 Crucial 8GB (4GB x 2) 
Hard DriveHard DriveOptical DriveCooling
SanDisk Extreme II - 240GB Western Digital RAID0 - 1TB LITE-ON iHAS124 CORSAIR Hydro H100i 
OSPowerCase
Windows 10 Pro Corsair TX750 Corsair Obsidian 250D 
  hide details  
Reply
post #1015 of 2014
Quote:
Originally Posted by FusionFX View Post
Just because a high multiplier is in place does not mean squat as far as if the CPU can break the 4GHz barrier. There are many G0s which simply cannot reach it even with insane voltage.

Lowing the multiplier to push FSB can be a plus. It can allow you to run your RAM at different speeds as well as increases your "rated FSB". In my case there has been various benchmarks by other users which run 450*8 and have shown increased performance in comparison to 400*9.


Stress testing with ORTHOS is a no-no with a Quad. Unless you run two instances which for the most part still does not work too well you will never max out 100% usage on all 4 cores.

The latest or at least later versions of PRIME95 work well with quad cores. The options of Small FFT to really stress the CPU and see the max temps or just the normal Blend work well. Small FFT usually maxes the cores within seconds while the Blend in Vista tends to take a few moments.
Yeah, indeed although the 'SP2004.exe' OTHROS does detect all cores, but yet it fails to actually function as an test. New Prime95 indeed seems working which I see as miracle, but I have to say..

after I tested everest 1 single time. That is something else on Quad-Cores.. If the box doesn't drop there (or heat like incredibly high) nothing will dump it down stressing fuither with all parts simulates perfect near chaos situation where game/program would REALLY fail and/or really crash(x64/multi-threaded Video/Audio encoding) against the hardware on hand. So I have to say I'd stand behind Everest (or perhaps also Passmark BurnInTest tool).

Would love also 2 other tests which I simply have been absolutely unable to find any solution to test. Other is Harddrive Fill up (I would like test program which literally fills/writes hard drive partition with data to last byte). and second test would be RAM Fill test. I mean test which simply takes all the RAM which is simply can muster Paging included and fills it up as new free resources comes.

but good pointers there..
OT
(14 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
I7-4820K Gigabyte GA-X79-UP4 AMD Radeon R9 290 ADATA 1866+ 
Hard DriveCoolingOSMonitor
Kingston HyperX 3K Corsair H80i/H110 + LN2 7 x64 42' 
KeyboardPowerCaseMouse
RAZER Lycosa Corsair AX760 modular platinum Lian-li / Corsair Carbide R500 Logitech R525 
  hide details  
Reply
OT
(14 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
I7-4820K Gigabyte GA-X79-UP4 AMD Radeon R9 290 ADATA 1866+ 
Hard DriveCoolingOSMonitor
Kingston HyperX 3K Corsair H80i/H110 + LN2 7 x64 42' 
KeyboardPowerCaseMouse
RAZER Lycosa Corsair AX760 modular platinum Lian-li / Corsair Carbide R500 Logitech R525 
  hide details  
Reply
post #1016 of 2014
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by genetix View Post
...
You seem to want to debate OCing techniques. I wont make this long, so just let me explain one simple method to my madness.

I personally like to know what voltages are required for certain FSB clocks. Now the smartest thing to do would be to take the CPU out of the equation by setting the multi to as low as possible. I also like to take the ram down to the lowest divider. Then as I OC the FSB. I can be pretty sure that any instability that occurs during that time is directly related to the NB. So if you disagree with my techniques, so be it. But I think it makes for "smart" OCing.

And a side note, I follow this method because not everyone has the same CPU with the same multi. So by doing this, I am able to help out as many people with an ASUS P5E board as I can.

But it seems you would rather flame me then help others in this thread.


no reply required...
Edited by ericeod - 10/5/08 at 10:51pm
My System
(16 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
6850K ASUS X99-AII eVGA GTX 1060 32Gb Team Vulcan DDR4 3000 Cas 15 
Hard DriveHard DriveHard DriveHard Drive
Samsung 960 EVO NVME Crucial M500 Seagate HDD Samsung F3 
CoolingOSMonitorKeyboard
H100i Windows 10 Pro 64 Samsung KU6300 40" Corsair K70 Vengeance 
PowerCaseMouse
Seasonic Gold 750W Phantek Enthoo Pro M Logitech G9X 
  hide details  
Reply
My System
(16 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
6850K ASUS X99-AII eVGA GTX 1060 32Gb Team Vulcan DDR4 3000 Cas 15 
Hard DriveHard DriveHard DriveHard Drive
Samsung 960 EVO NVME Crucial M500 Seagate HDD Samsung F3 
CoolingOSMonitorKeyboard
H100i Windows 10 Pro 64 Samsung KU6300 40" Corsair K70 Vengeance 
PowerCaseMouse
Seasonic Gold 750W Phantek Enthoo Pro M Logitech G9X 
  hide details  
Reply
post #1017 of 2014
Quote:
Originally Posted by ericeod View Post
You seem to want to debate OCing techniques. I wont make this long, so just let me explain one simple method to my madness.

I personally like to know what voltages are required for certain FSB clocks. Now the smartest thing to do would be to take the CPU out of the equation by setting the multi to as low as possible. I also like to take the ram down to the lowest divider. Then as I OC the FSB. I can be pretty sure that any instability that occurs during that time is directly related to the NB. So if you disagree with my techniques, so be it. But I think it makes for "smart" OCing.

And a side note, I follow this method because not everyone has the same CPU with the same multi. So by doing this, I am able to help out as many people with an ASUS P5E board as I can.

But it seems you would rather flame me then help others in this thread.
Yeah, that would be smart thing to do on a lot of different hardware in screen. I do agree with you there, I am talking about unique hardware and that's not the same. Wasn't about to make it sound like debate sorry about that.

Just saying my humble opinion of softwares and how to work with hardware as I go along with it. I can be wrong time after time on accusations of course what I say/said above, but the thing is I believe what I see on screen not by any network in the world could change my mind unless I would test and verify what they are saying and yet I would probably have my ow opinion about the matter.
OT
(14 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
I7-4820K Gigabyte GA-X79-UP4 AMD Radeon R9 290 ADATA 1866+ 
Hard DriveCoolingOSMonitor
Kingston HyperX 3K Corsair H80i/H110 + LN2 7 x64 42' 
KeyboardPowerCaseMouse
RAZER Lycosa Corsair AX760 modular platinum Lian-li / Corsair Carbide R500 Logitech R525 
  hide details  
Reply
OT
(14 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
I7-4820K Gigabyte GA-X79-UP4 AMD Radeon R9 290 ADATA 1866+ 
Hard DriveCoolingOSMonitor
Kingston HyperX 3K Corsair H80i/H110 + LN2 7 x64 42' 
KeyboardPowerCaseMouse
RAZER Lycosa Corsair AX760 modular platinum Lian-li / Corsair Carbide R500 Logitech R525 
  hide details  
Reply
post #1018 of 2014
@ericeod

Could you do me an favor and test that your 3,6Ghz (on first page) on Prime95 to be stable?

Prime95 v25.7:
http://www.freewarefiles.com/Prime-V_program_19638.html

..

I am here testing Q9450 on 465FSB and cannot get it stable no matter what I do on Prime95. First I though it was my Power since had AC power loss couple times, but then figured it's the RAM and raised DDR voltage to 2,26v and now I got very very near stable result, but somethings missing..

I am running now 0903 BIOS P5E, Actual voltages:
vCore: 1.25v (BIOS: 1.2750v)
CPU PLL: 1.58v (BIOS Value)(1.52v doesn't seem to suit to my setup)
RAM: 2.26v (BIOS: 2.14v)
FSB VTT: 1.33v (BIOS: 1.38v)
NB: 1.47v (BIOS: 1.43v)(I see no difference on 1.36v-1.47v, but since testing though to keep it higher)
GTL's: 0.63x, 0.67x
Edited by genetix - 10/7/08 at 3:05am
OT
(14 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
I7-4820K Gigabyte GA-X79-UP4 AMD Radeon R9 290 ADATA 1866+ 
Hard DriveCoolingOSMonitor
Kingston HyperX 3K Corsair H80i/H110 + LN2 7 x64 42' 
KeyboardPowerCaseMouse
RAZER Lycosa Corsair AX760 modular platinum Lian-li / Corsair Carbide R500 Logitech R525 
  hide details  
Reply
OT
(14 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
I7-4820K Gigabyte GA-X79-UP4 AMD Radeon R9 290 ADATA 1866+ 
Hard DriveCoolingOSMonitor
Kingston HyperX 3K Corsair H80i/H110 + LN2 7 x64 42' 
KeyboardPowerCaseMouse
RAZER Lycosa Corsair AX760 modular platinum Lian-li / Corsair Carbide R500 Logitech R525 
  hide details  
Reply
post #1019 of 2014
Quote:
Originally Posted by ericeod View Post
I personally like to know what voltages are required for certain FSB clocks. Now the smartest thing to do would be to take the CPU out of the equation by setting the multi to as low as possible. I also like to take the ram down to the lowest divider. Then as I OC the FSB. I can be pretty sure that any instability that occurs during that time is directly related to the NB. So if you disagree with my techniques, so be it. But I think it makes for "smart" OCing.
This isnt the best method. Every chip will be different, a dual core will require less voltage on the NB than a quad regardless of the multi. And as you increase the multi and run the same fsb you will need more voltage on the nb. With the P5n-e, for example, there is a balancing act because as you draw more power (whether it be more ram, bigger cpu, single or dual graphics cards) This isnt as bad a problem on this board because of the 8 phase power on the cpu and dual phase on the ram, but the problem still exists. So I think you would be wasting your time...
    
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
Intel 3930k @ stock  Asus P9x79ws EVGA 670 + EVGA 560 Ti 16gb Gskill 2133 @ 1.6v 
Hard DriveOptical DriveOSMonitor
Samsung 830 256Gb + 3.75 Tb ya Win8 5 - 24'' Dell U2412M 
KeyboardPowerCaseMouse
nope... entirely overrated Seasonic 1250w p182 of course... 
Mouse Pad
no 
  hide details  
Reply
    
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
Intel 3930k @ stock  Asus P9x79ws EVGA 670 + EVGA 560 Ti 16gb Gskill 2133 @ 1.6v 
Hard DriveOptical DriveOSMonitor
Samsung 830 256Gb + 3.75 Tb ya Win8 5 - 24'' Dell U2412M 
KeyboardPowerCaseMouse
nope... entirely overrated Seasonic 1250w p182 of course... 
Mouse Pad
no 
  hide details  
Reply
post #1020 of 2014
Quote:
Originally Posted by genetix View Post
@ericeod

Could you do me an favor and test that your 3,6Ghz (on first page) on Prime95 to be stable?

Prime95 v25.7:
http://www.freewarefiles.com/Prime-V_program_19638.html

..

I am here testing Q9450 on 465FSB and cannot get it stable no matter what I do on Prime95. First I though it was my Power since had AC power loss couple times, but then figured it's the RAM and raised DDR voltage to 2,26v and now I got very very near stable result, but somethings missing..

I am running now 0903 BIOS P5E, Actual voltages:
vCore: 1.25v (BIOS: 1.2750v)
CPU PLL: 1.58v (BIOS Value)(1.52v doesn't seem to suit to my setup)
RAM: 2.26v (BIOS: 2.14v)
FSB VTT: 1.33v (BIOS: 1.38v)
NB: 1.47v (BIOS: 1.43v)(I see no difference on 1.36v-1.47v, but since testing though to keep it higher)
GTL's: 0.63x, 0.67x
why dont you increase the vcore? Second I would lower the cpu pll 9 time out of 10 it doesnt help as much as you think it does.
    
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
Intel 3930k @ stock  Asus P9x79ws EVGA 670 + EVGA 560 Ti 16gb Gskill 2133 @ 1.6v 
Hard DriveOptical DriveOSMonitor
Samsung 830 256Gb + 3.75 Tb ya Win8 5 - 24'' Dell U2412M 
KeyboardPowerCaseMouse
nope... entirely overrated Seasonic 1250w p182 of course... 
Mouse Pad
no 
  hide details  
Reply
    
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
Intel 3930k @ stock  Asus P9x79ws EVGA 670 + EVGA 560 Ti 16gb Gskill 2133 @ 1.6v 
Hard DriveOptical DriveOSMonitor
Samsung 830 256Gb + 3.75 Tb ya Win8 5 - 24'' Dell U2412M 
KeyboardPowerCaseMouse
nope... entirely overrated Seasonic 1250w p182 of course... 
Mouse Pad
no 
  hide details  
Reply
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Intel Motherboards

Gear mentioned in this thread:

Overclock.net › Forums › Intel › Intel Motherboards › THE Asus Rampage Formula/Maximus Formula/P5E Deluxe/P5E Thread