Overclock.net › Forums › Intel › Intel CPUs › E8400 Degradation 4.5 -> 3.6 Ghz
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

E8400 Degradation 4.5 -> 3.6 Ghz - Page 6

post #51 of 91
Quote:
Originally Posted by ocnjk View Post
It is incredibly funny how most of you are spreading wrong information. Especially those that don't even have a 45nm chip.

It is pretty safe to run the chip above 1.4v on Vcore as long as you have sufficient cooling.

The max voltage spec that you guys keep referring to is the fsb voltage. This is not Vcore voltage. There is absolutely no reason to raise the fsb voltage to 1.4v as I am running 4.275 on 1.3v for the fsb voltage. I am however running 1.3875v on Vcore.

Do some research before you guys spew garbage on things you don't have a clue about.



Edit: For those that will probably skim through the article, they are referring to the VTT Voltage, otherwise known as the FSB Voltage. This is NOT Vcore voltage.
It is also incredibly funny that you can't spend 2 minutes on google before bashing others.




(I am at work, so the pic didn't come up. Here is the link if thats the case. http://processorfinder.intel.com/det...px?sSpec=SLAPL )
Edited by dralb - 6/11/08 at 7:37am
Current
(3 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphics
i5 6600k MSI Z170-A Pro RX-480 
  hide details  
Reply
Current
(3 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphics
i5 6600k MSI Z170-A Pro RX-480 
  hide details  
Reply
post #52 of 91
I thought these new cpu's were less power-happy? Pretty stupid idea to then push it even further then someone would normally do with an older series... 1.65 is just mental to be honest.
So sexy it Hz
(8 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
[i7 920 D0] [Asus P6T Deluxe V2] [EVGA GTX 1070 SC Gaming ACX 3.0] [12Gb PC3-16000 Kingston HyperX T1] 
Hard DriveMonitorPowerCase
[2x120GB Vertex2] [WD6401AALS] [WD15EARS] [WD30... [Dell 3007WFP] [Acer P191w] [TX850] [Silverstone FT02-BW] 
  hide details  
Reply
So sexy it Hz
(8 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
[i7 920 D0] [Asus P6T Deluxe V2] [EVGA GTX 1070 SC Gaming ACX 3.0] [12Gb PC3-16000 Kingston HyperX T1] 
Hard DriveMonitorPowerCase
[2x120GB Vertex2] [WD6401AALS] [WD15EARS] [WD30... [Dell 3007WFP] [Acer P191w] [TX850] [Silverstone FT02-BW] 
  hide details  
Reply
post #53 of 91
Quote:
Originally Posted by dralb View Post
It is also incredibly funny that you can't spend 2 minutes on google before bashing others.

Again, go find me where you see experienced overclockers that actually know what they are doing that believe in degredation above 1.4 VCORE. I've already linked you to one where they say the VTT is the cause, not VCORE.

There has been a link already provided from the xtreme forums that shows evidence of degredation to be non-existant.

In either case, I'll enjoy pushing my chip while all the believers of this false sense of degredation can spend more money on replacing chips to hit 4ghz+ on less than 1.365v.

Going on 4.275GHZ @1.3875v Vcore for several months now and still working like a beast. Can pass prime95 12hour stable on same settings since the beginning. FSB Voltage has never been raise above 1.3v
post #54 of 91
yeah I've been over 1.5 vcore now for going on 2 weeks straight. I run a stability test EVERY night for approximately 6-8hrs. This pupping hasn't went anywhere. I have my own theory that I'm still testing.

These 45nm chips are more sensitive to ambients than the 65nm's. What I've found, even with watercooling, is that the lower the ambients the better the overclock, lower the voltage, and longer the stability test. Also, higher the overclock the more sensitive the 45nm is to ambient temp change.
Edited by NCspecV81 - 6/11/08 at 7:59am
Always Changing
(13 items)
 
  
CPUGraphicsRAMHard Drive
12 threads of euphemism Bash me! It's not your color! Loose. THAT'S WHAT SHE SAID! Just enough for all my cp 
OSMonitorPower
linux for gaming plethora of pixels plethora of watts 
  hide details  
Reply
Always Changing
(13 items)
 
  
CPUGraphicsRAMHard Drive
12 threads of euphemism Bash me! It's not your color! Loose. THAT'S WHAT SHE SAID! Just enough for all my cp 
OSMonitorPower
linux for gaming plethora of pixels plethora of watts 
  hide details  
Reply
post #55 of 91
Your voltage was way to high. No surprises here...
Work Work
(14 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
Xeon X5670 @ 3.33GHz EVGA Classified X58 (Westmere Modded) AMD 6950 2GB G. Skill Ripjaws 24GB 
Hard DriveCoolingOSMonitor
Samsung 850 EVO 500GB Scythe FUMA  Windows 10 Pro 64 NEC PA241W 
KeyboardPowerCaseMouse
Magicforce 68 (Gat. Blue) Ultra X3 1000W Dremel Modded CM Cosmos S Logitech G700 
Other
Wacom Intuos 4 
  hide details  
Reply
Work Work
(14 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
Xeon X5670 @ 3.33GHz EVGA Classified X58 (Westmere Modded) AMD 6950 2GB G. Skill Ripjaws 24GB 
Hard DriveCoolingOSMonitor
Samsung 850 EVO 500GB Scythe FUMA  Windows 10 Pro 64 NEC PA241W 
KeyboardPowerCaseMouse
Magicforce 68 (Gat. Blue) Ultra X3 1000W Dremel Modded CM Cosmos S Logitech G700 
Other
Wacom Intuos 4 
  hide details  
Reply
post #56 of 91
Quote:
Originally Posted by ocnjk View Post
Again, go find me where you see experienced overclockers that actually know what they are doing that believe in degredation above 1.4 VCORE. I've already linked you to one where they say the VTT is the cause, not VCORE.

There has been a link already provided from the xtreme forums that shows evidence of degredation to be non-existant.

In either case, I'll enjoy pushing my chip while all the believers of this false sense of degredation can spend more money on replacing chips to hit 4ghz+ on less than 1.365v.

Going on 4.275GHZ @1.3875v Vcore for several months now and still working like a beast. Can pass prime95 12hour stable on same settings since the beginning. FSB Voltage has never been raise above 1.3v


Well, unless you have access to an electron microscope, you will never prove to me that degradation doesn't happen. It is a common occurance with ALL electronics, it is just a matter of how much and how fast. VTT voltage is commonly used fior stabilizing quads, but is very rarely needed with dual cores. Just because anandtech killed a QX with high VTT does not prove that high vcore doesn't kill the 45nm as well. Just becasue a few people over at XS polled that they do not believe in degradation doesn't prove a thing either. What people claim and what they are actually doing are very different things in the OCing world.

Since there is no way for me to porve anyomnes OCing ability without researching all their posts etc. (sorry, not gonna happen) and even then, there are so many other factors involved that it becomes moot. Just becasue there are people out there that have had no problems for a few months at higher vcore prosves nothing. There are just as many that fried their CPU's.

Why do you think Intel had 65nm with a vcore limit near 1.5, but once the 45nm CPU's ame out it dropped to 1.3625v? The higher the voltage range they can use, the more CPU's they can sell. (as in, more of the poorer batches can be cranked up to run the stock speeds and stay intact throughout the warranty period.)

I am happy that your CPU has been running fine. But you have in no way proven that degradation doesn't occur or that higher vcore does not accelerate it.



edit: I am at work now, but I plan on reading the entire anandtech article and the XS thread when I have mroe time. We'll see if my thoughts change then....)
Current
(3 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphics
i5 6600k MSI Z170-A Pro RX-480 
  hide details  
Reply
Current
(3 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphics
i5 6600k MSI Z170-A Pro RX-480 
  hide details  
Reply
post #57 of 91
Quote:
Originally Posted by ImmortalKenny View Post
I cringed when I looked at the vcore you were running.

R.I.P. e8400
I know I did the same thing.
HAL
(13 items)
 
Plain Jane
(13 items)
 
 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
Intel 4670K Asrock Z87E-ITX Gigabyte Vega 56 G.Skill Trident X 2400 2x4GB CL10 
Hard DriveHard DriveCoolingOS
840 EVO 250GB 1TB WD Black Noctua NH-U14S Windows 8.1 
MonitorMonitorKeyboardPower
Benq XL2420TE Nixeus EDG 27 Corsair K65 Silverstone 550w Platinum 
Case
Fractal Design Nano S 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
E7500 @ 3.6 EP45-UD3P HIS 7770 4GB 1100 G.Skill PI's 
Hard DriveOptical DriveOSMonitor
Seagate 320GB , 1TB WD Black ASUS 24X  Windows 7 64bit Samsung 204 BW 20" 1680 x 1050 
PowerCase
Seasonic X-560 Lian Li PC-9F 
  hide details  
Reply
HAL
(13 items)
 
Plain Jane
(13 items)
 
 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
Intel 4670K Asrock Z87E-ITX Gigabyte Vega 56 G.Skill Trident X 2400 2x4GB CL10 
Hard DriveHard DriveCoolingOS
840 EVO 250GB 1TB WD Black Noctua NH-U14S Windows 8.1 
MonitorMonitorKeyboardPower
Benq XL2420TE Nixeus EDG 27 Corsair K65 Silverstone 550w Platinum 
Case
Fractal Design Nano S 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
E7500 @ 3.6 EP45-UD3P HIS 7770 4GB 1100 G.Skill PI's 
Hard DriveOptical DriveOSMonitor
Seagate 320GB , 1TB WD Black ASUS 24X  Windows 7 64bit Samsung 204 BW 20" 1680 x 1050 
PowerCase
Seasonic X-560 Lian Li PC-9F 
  hide details  
Reply
post #58 of 91
1.65v on a 45nm...I was afraid to bench my crappy e2180 at 1.65v, LOL.

I'm sorry man, that really sucks... But look at it this way--3.6GHz is better than stock...

Quote:
Originally Posted by iggster View Post
You guys are just a bunch of girly girls to scared to pump some juice and for what a $200 chip? I have ran 1.5 on my $1000 and what
Cool, now dump 1.65v into it for constant use and let's see what happens...
Edited by guyladouche - 6/11/08 at 8:47am
    
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
i5-2500K Biostar TP67B+ XFX HD5750 1GB 2x4GB DDR3 Corsair 1600 
Hard DriveOSMonitorPower
60GB OCZ SSD, 2x160GB HDD RAID0, 500GB+500GB+1.5TB Windows 7 Ultimate 64-bit Samsung SyncMaster 930B Antec SmartPower 450w 
Case
Antec 900 
  hide details  
Reply
    
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
i5-2500K Biostar TP67B+ XFX HD5750 1GB 2x4GB DDR3 Corsair 1600 
Hard DriveOSMonitorPower
60GB OCZ SSD, 2x160GB HDD RAID0, 500GB+500GB+1.5TB Windows 7 Ultimate 64-bit Samsung SyncMaster 930B Antec SmartPower 450w 
Case
Antec 900 
  hide details  
Reply
post #59 of 91
Quote:
Originally Posted by ocnjk View Post
It is incredibly funny how most of you are spreading wrong information. Especially those that don't even have a 45nm chip.

It is pretty safe to run the chip above 1.4v on Vcore as long as you have sufficient cooling.

The max voltage spec that you guys keep referring to is the fsb voltage. This is not Vcore voltage. There is absolutely no reason to raise the fsb voltage to 1.4v as I am running 4.275 on 1.3v for the fsb voltage. I am however running 1.3875v on Vcore.
Do some research before you guys spew garbage on things you don't have a clue about.

http://www.anandtech.com/weblog/showpost.aspx?i=428

Edit: For those that will probably skim through the article, they are referring to the VTT Voltage, otherwise known as the FSB Voltage. This is NOT Vcore voltage.
Fill in your system specs w/validation.
Post back re-validation in 6 months if you don't mind.
When you make a statement as such:
"Do some research before you guys spew garbage on things you don't have a clue about."
It begs for backup of your postion.
Google can be your friend, or come back to bite you in the a**
post #60 of 91
Quote:
Originally Posted by ocnjk View Post
Again, go find me where you see experienced overclockers that actually know what they are doing that believe in degredation above 1.4 VCORE. I've already linked you to one where they say the VTT is the cause, not VCORE.

There has been a link already provided from the xtreme forums that shows evidence of degredation to be non-existant.

In either case, I'll enjoy pushing my chip while all the believers of this false sense of degredation can spend more money on replacing chips to hit 4ghz+ on less than 1.365v.

Going on 4.275GHZ @1.3875v Vcore for several months now and still working like a beast. Can pass prime95 12hour stable on same settings since the beginning. FSB Voltage has never been raise above 1.3v
Link?
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Intel CPUs
Overclock.net › Forums › Intel › Intel CPUs › E8400 Degradation 4.5 -> 3.6 Ghz