Overclock.net banner

1 - 19 of 19 Posts

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
4,764 Posts
Discussion Starter #1
Hey OCN.

During my hard-fought quest for more speed I've learned so much from these awesome forums. Last night supaspoon really shed some light on something I'd been grappling with for a while now..."How much voltage is too much for those of us who prefer to stay on the shallow side of the pool?"

Here's what he shared with me:

"1.3625v is the maximum vid (being the max vid you could possibly get on a new chip), which is not the same as the max vcore rating.......being 1.45v. This is a common misconception and many people stick to or near the 1.36v number anyway, but technically it's not a big deal so long as your temps are good."

After reading up on the Intel Data for E7XX & E8XX Chips he was comepletely right.





THE WARNING FOR UPPING VCORES



I just wanted to share this with you guys so, if you get a hard-headed chip like mine, don't be afraid to give it a little extra juice to get where you want to be.

I also wanted to thank everyone who has ever chimed in and helped me as I go learning and oc'ing. I always try and REP you all.
 
  • Rep+
Reactions: 21276

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
4,764 Posts
Discussion Starter #3

·
Banned
Joined
·
2,905 Posts
Let me see if I got it right:

1.36v is the max VID a chip can come with? Meaning that any given chip might need those 1.36v to run @ stock speeds? And that you can safely go to 1.45v and a little beyond while being safe?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,422 Posts
OMG this is good stuff I can get 4.04GHz with 1.3625vcore. I might bumping it to 1.38vcore and go for 4.20GHz
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,942 Posts
Quote:


Originally Posted by PanicProne
View Post

Let me see if I got it right:

1.36v is the max VID a chip can come with? Meaning that any given chip might need those 1.36v to run @ stock speeds? And that you can safely go to 1.45v and a little beyond while being safe?

Yep VID is the voltage needed to run at stock speeds. It's different per chip and a lower VID is preferred since they'll generally run cooler and oc better
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,493 Posts
Always glad to help.
And thanks for trying to spread the info. As for all the q's, yeah according to intel spec yeah the chip is supposed to be able to handle it. Of course, this is all assuming you're cooling is cool enough to keep it in check.

Quote:

Originally Posted by igob8a View Post
Yep VID is the voltage needed to run at stock speeds. It's different per chip and a lower VID is preferred since they'll generally run cooler and oc better
This point I actually find a little interesting. I've heard that while lower vid chips generally achieve a favorable clock/vcore ratio, that they also generally run hotter than higher vid chips at comparable vcore values. In that case, low vid chips would achieve better clocks per volt, but theoretically higher vid chips should be better able to push higher volts to achieve those same clocks....as a result of running a littler cooler per. voltage. (wow that's was a mouthful.) Basically, that having a high vid isn't the end of the world, as it should be more capable than a low vid chip of handling high voltages, and as a result still be capable of similar clocks.

Anyway, just thought I'd throw that out there if there's anyone w/ more experience that might be able to chime in on the subject.
 

·
Guess I'm Back
Joined
·
3,667 Posts
You guys need to read. Those are absolute minimum and maximum ratings that "LIE OUTSIDE OF THE FUNCTIONAL LIMITS OF THE PROCESSOR."

This means that these are the absolute maximum and minimum ratings for the processor, meaning do not go above (or below) these ratings unless you want to fry your chip, and it goes on to say that these settings will degrade the life of your processor. The maximum functional limit of the processor is 1.3625V, meaning if you stay at or below this vcore, the life of the processor will not degrade. If you expect some life degradation, then you can exceed this vcore UP TO 1.45V. Anything over that will seriously degrade the life of the chip, or fry it all together.

That is what this spec sheet is saying.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,493 Posts
Quote:


Originally Posted by c00lkatz
View Post

You guys need to read. Those are absolute minimum and maximum ratings that "LIE OUTSIDE OF THE FUNCTIONAL LIMITS OF THE PROCESSOR."

This means that these are the absolute maximum and minimum ratings for the processor, meaning do not go above (or below) these ratings unless you want to fry your chip, and it goes on to say that these settings will degrade the life of your processor. The maximum functional limit of the processor is 1.3625V, meaning if you stay at or below this vcore, the life of the processor will not degrade. If you expect some life degradation, then you can exceed this vcore UP TO 1.45V. Anything over that will seriously degrade the life of the chip, or fry it all together.

That is what this spec sheet is saying.

I don't think anyone has tried to say otherwise. Imho if you increase voltage at all you should do so understanding that it will decrease the life of the chip. Wether that's from 10 years to 5 years, or to 6 months is for the most part speculation.......and that's the risk we take. I think most people here understand that.

Point being that using 1.4vcore should not "kill" (as in like within a few days/weeks) your chip.

It's all relative anyway, how cold can you keep it? Another thread debating this yesterday I linked to a thread where 'coldbug' has been running a qx9650 at 1.55vcore FOR A YEAR with no problems what so ever. Obviously, he keeps it cold as hell on a ss, but just to illustrate my point.......it's relative.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
4,764 Posts
Discussion Starter #13
Quote:

Originally Posted by PanicProne View Post
Let me see if I got it right:

1.36v is the max VID a chip can come with? Meaning that any given chip might need those 1.36v to run @ stock speeds? And that you can safely go to 1.45v and a little beyond while being safe?
Yes. VID is each individual chips "Voltage Identification" when it's tested to run stable at it's stock speed. Which is why even chips of the same make, model even batch sometimes have different VID's most of the time.

But if I understand the data sheets correctly it makes sense that if a chip of these two series come of the line requiring more than 1.3625v to run stock it's a reject.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
4,764 Posts
Discussion Starter #14
Quote:

Originally Posted by c00lkatz View Post
You guys need to read. Those are absolute minimum and maximum ratings that "LIE OUTSIDE OF THE FUNCTIONAL LIMITS OF THE PROCESSOR."

This means that these are the absolute maximum and minimum ratings for the processor, meaning do not go above (or below) these ratings unless you want to fry your chip, and it goes on to say that these settings will degrade the life of your processor. The maximum functional limit of the processor is 1.3625V, meaning if you stay at or below this vcore, the life of the processor will not degrade. If you expect some life degradation, then you can exceed this vcore UP TO 1.45V. Anything over that will seriously degrade the life of the chip, or fry it all together.

That is what this spec sheet is saying.
True that. That's why I included Intel's warning. Basically it just says the chips can (have been tested) to run at those min/max but it's highly recommended you not do it.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
4,764 Posts
Discussion Starter #15
Quote:

Originally Posted by PanicProne View Post
Does that mean I can pump the vcore to 1.45v and rock my E8400 @ 4.4ghz safely?
Read the warning again....

Intel has tested the chips and they did run at those min/max but the strongly say you shouldn't do it.

I posted this just to kind of explain the whole VID thing more clearly--nothing more.

You have to take a lot of things into account when you raise your vcore really high like voltage spikes and heat.

I'm not saying you should just go off and hit 1.45 and think you're 100% safe because you may not be because your outside the "operational limit.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
17,407 Posts
Yes the 45nm chips have a max VID of 1.3625v (I dont know why they changed how they listed their specs from the 65nm which list the max vcore). It was adopted as the "Safe" vcore because beople were damaging their chips at 1.40v and higher. The 1.45v listed as the absolute max vcore also has a warning that damage to the chip can result (which you do not have in the screen shot).

So my take on this issue is this: If someone new to overclocking askes about safe voltages, I stress 1.3625v. If someone has good cooling, and understands the risk of OCing, I point out the 1.3625v, but let them know the absolute max is 1.45v, with a warning.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
4,764 Posts
Discussion Starter #17
Quote:


Originally Posted by ericeod
View Post

Yes the 45nm chips have a max VID of 1.3625v (I dont know why they changed how they listed their specs from the 65nm which list the max vcore). It was adopted as the "Safe" vcore because beople were damaging their chips at 1.40v and higher. The 1.45v listed as the absolute max vcore also has a warning that damage to the chip can result (which you do not have in the screen shot).

So my take on this issue is this: If someone new to overclocking askes about safe voltages, I stress 1.3625v. If someone has good cooling, and understands the risk of OCing, I point out the 1.3625v, but let them know the absolute max is 1.45v, with a warning.

And that's exactly why I love these forums. Good folks always looking out for one another.
 
  • Rep+
Reactions: grishkathefool

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
4,764 Posts
Discussion Starter #19
Quote:


Originally Posted by grishkathefool
View Post

In fact, isn't the VID for the e8xxx .85v - 1.3625v?

You got me...

I just copied and pasted griska
 
1 - 19 of 19 Posts
Top