Overclock.net › Forums › Intel › Intel CPUs › Overclocking Inconsistencies?
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Overclocking Inconsistencies?

post #1 of 6
Thread Starter 
I recently decided to continue my research on overclocking, since my last article which was about Fine Tuning Your Overclock, since then I've learned the power of Isolating your Base Clock (aka, formally known as FSB) from the CPU & RAM.

After isolating my base clock by setting it to 196 and changing my CPU Multiplier to x14 (2.7 GHz) and my RAM at X6 (1184), I set my IMC voltage and then ran test, eventually I was able to stabilize my Overclock of the Base Clock, having a consistent LinX run. (All time & Gflops were the same) Of course to get stability I had to change my IMC voltages to find the best results (this is paramount!).

Next, I turned up the CPU Multiplier to X17 & increased the voltage for the CPU, surprisingly I got it right the first time, and was able to get a very stable LinX stress test with the same results. (*see picture below)



The problem is, the Time & Gflops are exactly the same for the x14 & x17 CPU Multiplier, though the difference is about .5 GHz, meaning there seems to be no increase in performance, based upon Time & Gflops of the testing...

Is this normal, or is something discernibly wrong here?

(Could it be that I don't have my voltage high enough on my CPU? It's at 1.232v)

Any help would be appreciated, thanks..

I turned up my CPU Multiplier and got faster results out of LinX 62 Seconds @ 50 Gflops, but I wasn't able to stabilize the results...

I'm seriously thinking it's a CPU Voltage issue, but I cannot tell for sure, further testing will ensue and I will list findings below..
Edited by _GTech - 2/22/11 at 1:25pm
The Rock
(15 items)
 
  
Reply
The Rock
(15 items)
 
  
Reply
post #2 of 6
If You CPU runs faster than you memory can feed it, what happens, it waits for the data, thats why I go for higher base clock and not just a high multi.

Higher Base clock = More memory speed, just remember good quality RAM is your friend.
Aces and Eights
(15 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
955 X4 BE [3.82 Ghz] Lanparty DK 790FX  HIS 6870 X 2 CFX 4Gig OCZ Reaper DDR2 800 
Hard DriveHard DriveOptical DriveCooling
2X Hitachi 1TB raid 0 Seagate Barracuda Sony DVD RW DRU 830A  Coolermaster Hyper 212+  
OSMonitorPowerCase
Win 7 64Bit Benq HD 2200 Antec True Power 650W HAF 932 
  hide details  
Reply
Aces and Eights
(15 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
955 X4 BE [3.82 Ghz] Lanparty DK 790FX  HIS 6870 X 2 CFX 4Gig OCZ Reaper DDR2 800 
Hard DriveHard DriveOptical DriveCooling
2X Hitachi 1TB raid 0 Seagate Barracuda Sony DVD RW DRU 830A  Coolermaster Hyper 212+  
OSMonitorPowerCase
Win 7 64Bit Benq HD 2200 Antec True Power 650W HAF 932 
  hide details  
Reply
post #3 of 6
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Doom View Post
If You CPU runs faster than you memory can feed it, what happens, it waits for the data, thats why I go for higher base clock and not just a high multi.

Higher Base clock = More memory speed, just remember good quality RAM is your friend.
I am at a 196 Base Clock...

I upped the voltage on the CPU and it is getting better time & Gflops now...

But the results are not stable, meh!

===========================

I'm having problems now....

After changing from 196 Base Clock to 166, I cannot get the base clock to stabilize...
I had it stable before, now the Time is 76-79 Seconds (Fluctuating) & The GFlops are also fluctuating... Inconsistency is what I want to avoid...

So, I'm going to try to adjust IMC to the extreme and see what happens (much lower).

I tried the IMC @ 1.23v, and it wasn't stable...
I just tried 1.16 and that didn't work either...
I'm gonna try some more testing and see if I can get it to normalize....

What I really need to know is where I should set CPU Voltages for Stock, I have it on Auto and that shouldn't be a problem because the clock is at 2.56 (close to stock) though the CPU Multiplier is at x16...

Anyone have some help for me?
Edited by _GTech - 2/22/11 at 1:26pm
The Rock
(15 items)
 
  
Reply
The Rock
(15 items)
 
  
Reply
post #4 of 6
Thread Starter 
I cannot get my IMC Stable at 166, grrrrrrrrr....

I'm gonna keep trying, but it seems at 166 Base Clock that IMC Shouldn't be higher than 1.68 - 1.22 I have tried both and many settings in between, cannot get anything to stabilize yet.... This is very frustrating indeed...
Edited by _GTech - 2/22/11 at 2:57pm
The Rock
(15 items)
 
  
Reply
The Rock
(15 items)
 
  
Reply
post #5 of 6
Thread Starter 
Nevermind, I got everything stable, stress tested today, and everything is great.

I wanted 3.3 & 3.5 GHz @ 166 & 196 BCLK, it was some work but I got it just right!

After a whole day of tweaking / testing / stabilizing BCLK / IMCv, I spend the rest of the time increasing the CPU Multiplier and Bumping voltage & stress testing for stability.

After a long days work I'm extremely pleased to say I have mastered this build finally!

Yay!



Next, I'm going to repack my cooler & try for some different overclocks (if I can get temps down)...

BTW: Is 70c too hot on an i5-750? (The OC was stable at 70c for 20 LinX runs w/ 0 issues.)
Edited by _GTech - 2/23/11 at 1:34am
The Rock
(15 items)
 
  
Reply
The Rock
(15 items)
 
  
Reply
post #6 of 6
Well done if you are happy with it thats all that matters.
Aces and Eights
(15 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
955 X4 BE [3.82 Ghz] Lanparty DK 790FX  HIS 6870 X 2 CFX 4Gig OCZ Reaper DDR2 800 
Hard DriveHard DriveOptical DriveCooling
2X Hitachi 1TB raid 0 Seagate Barracuda Sony DVD RW DRU 830A  Coolermaster Hyper 212+  
OSMonitorPowerCase
Win 7 64Bit Benq HD 2200 Antec True Power 650W HAF 932 
  hide details  
Reply
Aces and Eights
(15 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
955 X4 BE [3.82 Ghz] Lanparty DK 790FX  HIS 6870 X 2 CFX 4Gig OCZ Reaper DDR2 800 
Hard DriveHard DriveOptical DriveCooling
2X Hitachi 1TB raid 0 Seagate Barracuda Sony DVD RW DRU 830A  Coolermaster Hyper 212+  
OSMonitorPowerCase
Win 7 64Bit Benq HD 2200 Antec True Power 650W HAF 932 
  hide details  
Reply
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Intel CPUs
Overclock.net › Forums › Intel › Intel CPUs › Overclocking Inconsistencies?