Overclock.net › Forums › Intel › Intel CPUs › Why do OCers set temp limits at 85 in prime? Prime doesn't equate to real world use.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Why do OCers set temp limits at 85 in prime? Prime doesn't equate to real world use. - Page 5

post #41 of 49
Quote:
Originally Posted by roflolol;12287547 
And 1.375 Vcore! I've reseated quite a few times and applied my thermal compound in a bunch of different ways. My temps are normal- it only just touches 80. The other cores are in the low 70s.

Yes, I think it is relatively high
I have 2 systems:
HT off, 4.8 1.35vCore gets me about 65c max
HT on, 4.6 1.35vCore gets me about 68c max

both have True 120/push pull.

The only reason I would be concerned is if the high temps are a symptom of something else - too much or too little TIM, or a badly seated heat sink or not enough circulation in the case, etc.
My System
(13 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
i7 2600k Asus Pro Sapphire 6970 Corsair 4x4 
Hard DriveOSPowerMouse Pad
corsair 300 win 7 x64 None My desk 
  hide details  
Reply
My System
(13 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
i7 2600k Asus Pro Sapphire 6970 Corsair 4x4 
Hard DriveOSPowerMouse Pad
corsair 300 win 7 x64 None My desk 
  hide details  
Reply
post #42 of 49
Quote:
Originally Posted by gooddog View Post
Is that true? Is the MTBF for a chip running at 55c half of one that is running at 40c?

That would mean that a chip running at 70c has a significant MTBF difference than a chip running at 40c.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Segovax View Post
Im rge on xtreme and ocn.com, read my post here, especially the slide in red from los alamos US national science/security center:
http://www.overclockers.com/forums/s...2&postcount=92

But bottom line, the 10-15C drop in temp halving mtbf of most electrical components and certainly cpus, has been known and undisputed for 30 years, via multiple real life data from nasa, other us govt, big chip makers like ibm, etc. Based on the arrhenius equation.
My System
(15 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
6900K 4.4ghz  MSI X99A Krait Titan XP Gskill 32GB 3200 C14 
Hard DriveHard DriveCoolingOS
Samsung 960 Pro 1TB OS Samsung 850 pro 1TB games D5, XT45 280 rad, Nemesis 280 rad,  Windows 10 64bit 
MonitorPowerCase
Acer Predator XB271HU 144hz Seasonic Prime Titanium 850 Fractal Design R5 
  hide details  
Reply
My System
(15 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
6900K 4.4ghz  MSI X99A Krait Titan XP Gskill 32GB 3200 C14 
Hard DriveHard DriveCoolingOS
Samsung 960 Pro 1TB OS Samsung 850 pro 1TB games D5, XT45 280 rad, Nemesis 280 rad,  Windows 10 64bit 
MonitorPowerCase
Acer Predator XB271HU 144hz Seasonic Prime Titanium 850 Fractal Design R5 
  hide details  
Reply
post #43 of 49
Quote:
Originally Posted by gooddog View Post
AFAIK, that is not true.

No where does Intel list what the maximum safe voltage for the i7.

They do list the maximum possible VID, but there is NO correlation between what a maximum VID is and what a safe voltage is.

All that the VID range does it tell motherboard makers that they need to be able to provide a certain amount of voltage if that is required by a CPU that happens to have that VID.

That does not mean that a CPU will ever have that VID nor be safe at the voltage.

People keep confusing VID with Vcore.
Don't post just to say you don't know the numbers. You are just confirming your ignorance and not helping anyone out.

Intel white papers states for the i7 that max Vcore is 1.55 V, above which you should expect degradation.

http://download.intel.com/design/pro...hts/320834.pdf



Quote:
At conditions exceeding absolute maximum and minimum ratings, neither functionality nor long-term reliability can be expected. Moreover, if a device is subjected to these conditions for any length of time then, when returned to conditions within the functional operating condition limits, it will either not function or its reliability will be severely degraded.
Reading it another way, at conditions between min and max you should expect functionality and long-term reliability.
Edited by InsightSoul - 2/6/11 at 4:57pm
post #44 of 49
Quote:
Originally Posted by InsightSoul View Post
Don't post just to say you don't know the numbers. You are just confirming your ignorance and not helping anyone out.

Intel white papers states for the i7 that max Vcore is 1.55 V, above which you should expect degradation.


Reading it another way, at conditions between min and max you should expect functionality and long-term reliability.
Awesome.
This is what I was looking for. Thanks.

But please re-read what I wrote. My point was that people were using the VID range, NOT the Vcc range.

What you pointed out was the Vcc range.
My System
(13 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
i7 2600k Asus Pro Sapphire 6970 Corsair 4x4 
Hard DriveOSPowerMouse Pad
corsair 300 win 7 x64 None My desk 
  hide details  
Reply
My System
(13 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
i7 2600k Asus Pro Sapphire 6970 Corsair 4x4 
Hard DriveOSPowerMouse Pad
corsair 300 win 7 x64 None My desk 
  hide details  
Reply
post #45 of 49
Quote:
Originally Posted by opt33 View Post
Im rge on xtreme and ocn.com, read my post here, especially the slide in red from los alamos US national science/security center:
http://www.overclockers.com/forums/s...2&postcount=92

But bottom line, the 10-15C drop in temp halving mtbf of most electrical components and certainly cpus, has been known and undisputed for 30 years, via multiple real life data from nasa, other us govt, big chip makers like ibm, etc. Based on the arrhenius equation.
Weird. I thought the Arrhenius equation was:
(1) based on room temperature as a base.
(2) states that the reaction rate doubles every 10c, not the failure rate.
My System
(13 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
i7 2600k Asus Pro Sapphire 6970 Corsair 4x4 
Hard DriveOSPowerMouse Pad
corsair 300 win 7 x64 None My desk 
  hide details  
Reply
My System
(13 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
i7 2600k Asus Pro Sapphire 6970 Corsair 4x4 
Hard DriveOSPowerMouse Pad
corsair 300 win 7 x64 None My desk 
  hide details  
Reply
post #46 of 49
Quote:
Originally Posted by gooddog View Post
Weird. I thought the Arrhenius equation was:
(1) based on room temperature as a base.
(2) states that the reaction rate doubles every 10c, not the failure rate.
You are correct, it's first use was as you described in chemistry. But in 1980's it was adapted to electronics failure. One example, National Semiconductor uses adapted Arrhenius equation to predict MTBF at different temps. Quote from it "In order to express accelerated test results in terms of expected failure rate at actual use conditions, semiconductor manufacturers commonly use the Arrhenius model."

Another company after testing with high temps to accelerate failure over short periods, also uses to predict longterm MTBF at normal usage temps.
Edited by opt33 - 2/6/11 at 7:31pm
My System
(15 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
6900K 4.4ghz  MSI X99A Krait Titan XP Gskill 32GB 3200 C14 
Hard DriveHard DriveCoolingOS
Samsung 960 Pro 1TB OS Samsung 850 pro 1TB games D5, XT45 280 rad, Nemesis 280 rad,  Windows 10 64bit 
MonitorPowerCase
Acer Predator XB271HU 144hz Seasonic Prime Titanium 850 Fractal Design R5 
  hide details  
Reply
My System
(15 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
6900K 4.4ghz  MSI X99A Krait Titan XP Gskill 32GB 3200 C14 
Hard DriveHard DriveCoolingOS
Samsung 960 Pro 1TB OS Samsung 850 pro 1TB games D5, XT45 280 rad, Nemesis 280 rad,  Windows 10 64bit 
MonitorPowerCase
Acer Predator XB271HU 144hz Seasonic Prime Titanium 850 Fractal Design R5 
  hide details  
Reply
post #47 of 49
Quote:
Originally Posted by InsightSoul View Post
Don't post just to say you don't know the numbers. You are just confirming your ignorance and not helping anyone out.

Intel white papers states for the i7 that max Vcore is 1.55 V, above which you should expect degradation.

.
btw, from table 2.7 of that spec what does this mean from the footnote? How does one determine the maximum VCC?

Quote:
Refer to Table 2-8 and Figure 2-3 for the minimum, typical, and maximum VCC allowed for a given current.
The processor should not be subjected to any VCC and ICC combination wherein VCC exceeds VCC_MAX for a given current.
My System
(13 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
i7 2600k Asus Pro Sapphire 6970 Corsair 4x4 
Hard DriveOSPowerMouse Pad
corsair 300 win 7 x64 None My desk 
  hide details  
Reply
My System
(13 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
i7 2600k Asus Pro Sapphire 6970 Corsair 4x4 
Hard DriveOSPowerMouse Pad
corsair 300 win 7 x64 None My desk 
  hide details  
Reply
post #48 of 49
Quote:
Originally Posted by opt33 View Post
You are correct, it's first use was as you described in chemistry. But in 1980's it was adapted to electronics failure. One example, National Semiconductor uses adapted Arrhenius equation to predict MTBF at different temps. Quote from it "In order to express accelerated test results in terms of expected failure rate at actual use conditions, semiconductor manufacturers commonly use the Arrhenius model."

Another company after testing with high temps to accelerate failure over short periods, also uses to predict longterm MTBF at normal usage temps.
Okay, but where does it say that for a CPU a 10-15c increase doubles the MTBF ???

Even the original use was not about failure, only about reactions.

It is fine that the use the concept of the model, but even if they used the exact model, that model is not about MTBF.
My System
(13 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
i7 2600k Asus Pro Sapphire 6970 Corsair 4x4 
Hard DriveOSPowerMouse Pad
corsair 300 win 7 x64 None My desk 
  hide details  
Reply
My System
(13 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
i7 2600k Asus Pro Sapphire 6970 Corsair 4x4 
Hard DriveOSPowerMouse Pad
corsair 300 win 7 x64 None My desk 
  hide details  
Reply
post #49 of 49
Quote:
Originally Posted by gooddog View Post
Okay, but where does it say that for a CPU a 10-15c increase doubles the MTBF ???

Even the original use was not about failure, only about reactions.

It is fine that the use the concept of the model, but even if they used the exact model, that model is not about MTBF.
If you didnt understand the links, google the terms yourself and read. You need to learn the difference between adapted from/based on vs actual arrhenius equation. Read about how many different temp based formulas are based on the arhennius equation, mtbf equation is only one.
Edited by opt33 - 2/7/11 at 5:38am
My System
(15 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
6900K 4.4ghz  MSI X99A Krait Titan XP Gskill 32GB 3200 C14 
Hard DriveHard DriveCoolingOS
Samsung 960 Pro 1TB OS Samsung 850 pro 1TB games D5, XT45 280 rad, Nemesis 280 rad,  Windows 10 64bit 
MonitorPowerCase
Acer Predator XB271HU 144hz Seasonic Prime Titanium 850 Fractal Design R5 
  hide details  
Reply
My System
(15 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
6900K 4.4ghz  MSI X99A Krait Titan XP Gskill 32GB 3200 C14 
Hard DriveHard DriveCoolingOS
Samsung 960 Pro 1TB OS Samsung 850 pro 1TB games D5, XT45 280 rad, Nemesis 280 rad,  Windows 10 64bit 
MonitorPowerCase
Acer Predator XB271HU 144hz Seasonic Prime Titanium 850 Fractal Design R5 
  hide details  
Reply
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Intel CPUs
  • Why do OCers set temp limits at 85 in prime? Prime doesn't equate to real world use.
Overclock.net › Forums › Intel › Intel CPUs › Why do OCers set temp limits at 85 in prime? Prime doesn't equate to real world use.