Regarding Memtest86+ and Memtest86:
It's more than just testing for defective memory. When overclocking the memory at all, it can reveal whether or not the overclock is stable because if it's not stable, then the memory will produce errors. After all, how can be called stable if the memory produces even just one error in Memtest?
But to actually stress
memory in order to test that type of stability, we can certainly use the Blend test in Prime95 (and perhaps even the In-place large FFTs), but I've been told a few times in the past that HCi Design's MemTest
is far superior (although, it's still important to use Prime95).
Regardless, Memtest86+/Memtest86 should not be ignored just because it's an error-checking program. After all, what if all of your testing passes perfectly but yet your memory produces errors in Memtest? What if tweaking the settings just a little bit gets rid of all of those errors? Or just the one error should it be just one.
Regarding LLC, just read these two pages and make up your own mind about it:
As for me, I will never, ever, ever, ever use LLC. This article made it clear that motherboard manufacturers only began to include this option due to demand; they knew that if they hadn't included it, then it would have killed their sales (and it would have pissed off a large number of people).
So is it really a myth? How can we be sure? And was it really perpetrated by some members? Maybe it's not a myth. Maybe time will eventually reveal to us that using LLC while overclocking a 45nm CPU (and now 32nm) is bad, or maybe it won't. But based on what those two pages show, there's no way I'm ever going to be convinced to use it - especially because I can't afford to replace it should it gradually become impossible to overclock it - even by 100 MHz. I mean, if using LLC could kill its ability to overclock (over the course of time), then I'd much rather replace it at that point instead of just dealing with it!
I apologize for being this way, but I love my stuff and I don't have any backup parts (I can't even afford to buy parts and set them aside just in case).
Originally Posted by B7ADE
Oh dear lord, maybe I should send you my Q66 just to depress you, that chip took 1.7 to do 3.6
Also, I see everyone setting their Performance Enhance to Turbo, is there really a use for that or am I just being a sissy by keeping it at Standard?
I think that leaving it on Standard could be better for overclocking. All of the advice I have received to date has always included leaving it on standard.Edited by TwoCables - 8/24/10 at 1:35pm