ROG Crosshair VI overclocking thread - Page 688 - Overclock.net - An Overclocking Community

Forum Jump: 

ROG Crosshair VI overclocking thread

Reply
 
Thread Tools
post #6871 of 45250 (permalink) Old 04-04-2017, 02:10 PM
New to Overclock.net
 
majestynl's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2017
Location: Amsterdam
Posts: 1,367
Rep: 98 (Unique: 48)
Quote:
Originally Posted by Timur Born View Post

Is it? ProbeIt is, but SVI2 TFN is not lowering Vcore when idle here. Both SVI2 and CH6 Vcore drop on load, as does the voltage at the CPU cap. A quick test at 1.35 V LLC1 measured the idle voltage (1.3534 max) closer to the SVI2 sensor, but the load voltage closer to the CH6 sensor. I hit a Code 8 just when I measured load voltage, so I forgot the load value (1.2xyz). Tomorrow I may find some time to do more thorough measurements. Maybe I can also grow a third hand to hit that reset button on the DMM while holding both probes. wheee.gif

No it isn't..small typo there:D....

Same here..not lowering on idle...but motherboard vcore (HWiNFO) and other SW reads are lowering!

majestynl is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #6872 of 45250 (permalink) Old 04-04-2017, 02:11 PM
New to Overclock.net
 
Timur Born's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2015
Posts: 1,448
Rep: 115 (Unique: 53)
Quote:
Originally Posted by majestynl View Post

even on 4Ghz?? i even cant start a CB when im not near the voltage it needs to be stable!
I better check again. Droop was 1.308 V on CH6 Vcore sensor and 1.29something on SVI2. It might be that this was 1.35 LLC2 vs. 1.375 LLC0 instead of 1.35 LLC0. I don't know if that was with BIOS 0902, 1001 or 0038, but 1002 uses a considerably higher Vcore when I run 4.0 GHz at Auto.

CPU
9900K
Motherboard
Gigabyte Aorus Master Z390
GPU
2070 Super
RAM
G.Skill TridentZ 3200-C14
Hard Drive
Adata SX8200 Pro
▲ hide details ▲
Timur Born is offline  
post #6873 of 45250 (permalink) Old 04-04-2017, 02:12 PM
New to Overclock.net
 
majestynl's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2017
Location: Amsterdam
Posts: 1,367
Rep: 98 (Unique: 48)
Quote:
Originally Posted by Timur Born View Post

I made my system emergency shutdown due to CPU temps. So who cared about some 1.5 V that doesn't even hit 100°C (something my 2011 Macbook Pro often does).

yepz, thats the spirit i made for my next journey.. i will give him the juice he needs for 4100+ cause im low on temps... lets see biggrin.gif..

majestynl is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #6874 of 45250 (permalink) Old 04-04-2017, 02:16 PM
New to Overclock.net
 
Timur Born's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2015
Posts: 1,448
Rep: 115 (Unique: 53)
Before I used ITB AVX I needed 1.308 V CH6 to be stress stable at 4.0 GHz, but I needed 1.410 at 4.05 GHz. So the wall is too steep to climb.

Going from 3.7 GHz to 4.0 GHz is a 7.5% increase, in return you lose 2.5% for single/dual core usage (4.1 GHz XFR). It would be really nice if 4.1 on all cores was possible within reasonable limits, but it doesn't look like it will be for this first batch of CPUs.

But of course I did some stress testing at 4.1 already here, that's when I hit over 95°C on Tctl. wink.gif

CPU
9900K
Motherboard
Gigabyte Aorus Master Z390
GPU
2070 Super
RAM
G.Skill TridentZ 3200-C14
Hard Drive
Adata SX8200 Pro
▲ hide details ▲
Timur Born is offline  
post #6875 of 45250 (permalink) Old 04-04-2017, 02:17 PM
New to Overclock.net
 
madweazl's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: NOVA
Posts: 1,211
Rep: 52 (Unique: 32)
Quote:
Originally Posted by Timur Born View Post

Yes, they can. But a VRM section that very audibly buzzes around doesn't exactly shout "highest quality". So it's at least something to take a look at, just in case something about the implementation is fishy.

True but noise doesnt imply they cant deliver power. I havent been able to hear mine at all because the poor lil 212 Evo in push/pull is begging for mercy LOL.

madweazl is offline  
post #6876 of 45250 (permalink) Old 04-04-2017, 02:22 PM
New to Overclock.net
 
majestynl's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2017
Location: Amsterdam
Posts: 1,367
Rep: 98 (Unique: 48)
Quote:
Originally Posted by Timur Born View Post

Before I used ITB AVX I needed 1.308 V CH6 to be stress stable at 4.0 GHz, but I needed 1.410 at 4.05 GHz. So the wall is too steep to climb.

Going from 3.7 GHz to 4.0 GHz is a 7.5% increase, in return you lose 2.5% for single/dual core usage (4.1 GHz XFR). It would be really nice if 4.1 on all cores was possible within reasonable limits, but it doesn't look like it will be for this first batch of CPUs.

But of course I did some stress testing at 4.1 already here, that's when I hit over 95°C on Tctl. wink.gif

Sounds familiar..
How much you neededed for 4.1 stress test ?

majestynl is offline  
post #6877 of 45250 (permalink) Old 04-04-2017, 02:24 PM
New to Overclock.net
 
Timur Born's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2015
Posts: 1,448
Rep: 115 (Unique: 53)
Quote:
Originally Posted by madweazl View Post

True but noise doesnt imply they cant deliver power. I havent been able to hear mine at all because the poor lil 212 Evo in push/pull is begging for mercy LOL.
Like most VRM related noise its frequency is modulated by load type (like mouse-movement induces frequencies according to USB polling rate) and its level (volume) correlates to CPU frequency. It gets really bad when you allow idle voltage to drop towards 0.5 V while keeping CPU clocks high. Switching to "Balanced/Power Safer" lowers the noise level by dropping the CPU clocks.

I know this from other mainboards and graphic-cards. With graphic-cards the frequency usually is based on the current frames per second (5000 fps creates a 5 KHz pitch), while the type of load (displayed image/scenery, like viewing around in a 3D game) filters this base frequency to alter the timbre. band.gif

One reason for me to invest in the rather expensive Fluke 289 was me hoping it could measures frequencies of this kind of noise on computer ground lines. But the signal level usually is too low even for the 289 to discern frequencies, though, plus it cannot handle too much modulation and overtones well. Any audio interface has higher dynamic range and is better suited to measure within the audible range, it's just less convenient than pulling out the DMM and sticking probes at stuff.

CPU
9900K
Motherboard
Gigabyte Aorus Master Z390
GPU
2070 Super
RAM
G.Skill TridentZ 3200-C14
Hard Drive
Adata SX8200 Pro
▲ hide details ▲
Timur Born is offline  
post #6878 of 45250 (permalink) Old 04-04-2017, 02:24 PM
New to Overclock.net
 
Timur Born's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2015
Posts: 1,448
Rep: 115 (Unique: 53)
Quote:
Originally Posted by majestynl View Post

Sounds familiar..
How much you neededed for 4.1 stress test ?
I don't remember, but it wasn't enough for stability when I tried. tongue.gif

CPU
9900K
Motherboard
Gigabyte Aorus Master Z390
GPU
2070 Super
RAM
G.Skill TridentZ 3200-C14
Hard Drive
Adata SX8200 Pro
▲ hide details ▲
Timur Born is offline  
post #6879 of 45250 (permalink) Old 04-04-2017, 02:30 PM
Linux Lobbyist
 
webhito's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Posts: 700
Rep: 6 (Unique: 6)
Could incompatible ram be throwing the q code 8?
I figured out my overvolting issue, I had the auto overclock option selected. Turned it off and voltage dropped. I am still having hard crashes though.
webhito is offline  
post #6880 of 45250 (permalink) Old 04-04-2017, 02:32 PM
New to Overclock.net
 
muffins's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: CA, US
Posts: 205
Rep: 14 (Unique: 10)
Quote:
Originally Posted by SpecChum View Post

Bear in mind that at stock the voltage you see isn't' the voltage you get; there's an internal AMD set offset of some 0.2v to 0.4v.

It's disabled in OC mode tho.

I'm fairly sure if you test with a DMM on stock volts you'll see much lower than shown.
plus or minus? i hope minus because when i see 1.52v's in hwinfo when it turbos to 4.1ghz i would feel a lot more comfortable if its actually in the 1.4v's range lol.

i don't know why but my crosshair shows more voltage going into my 1800x when it trubos than my gaming 5 did. it was rare to see 1.5v's on my gaming five. like i only saw it two - three times? mostly saw it under 1.45v's. crosshair... its frequent. either the crosshair is more aggressive or my gaming 5 wasn't as accurate as the crosshair.

also i tested this with three 1800x's. three on the crosshair, two on the gaming 5 and all had similar results regarding auto voltage with xfr enabled. with xfr disabled both the crosshair and gaming 5 where all similar at stock 3.6ghz. a fluctuation of 1.17-1.24v's.
muffins is offline  
Reply

Tags
Bios5 , profiles to usb

Quick Reply
Message:
Options

Register Now

In order to be able to post messages on the Overclock.net - An Overclocking Community forums, you must first register.
Please enter your desired user name, your email address and other required details in the form below.
User Name:
If you do not want to register, fill this field only and the name will be used as user name for your post.
Password
Please enter a password for your user account. Note that passwords are case-sensitive.
Password:
Confirm Password:
Email Address
Please enter a valid email address for yourself.
Email Address:

Log-in



Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 12 (3 members and 9 guests)
Dr. Vodka , hotbrass , theantipop91
Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Show Printable Version
Email this Page Email this Page


Forum Jump: 

Posting Rules  
You may post new threads
You may post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off