- Joined
- Jun 7, 2007
I have my X3220 B3 at stock speeds on 1.1v, dropped my temps a **** ton (~5-6 degrees) and is completely stable (2x orthos for an hour 1/2 or so atleast). Is this uncommon?
-
Welcome to Overclockers Forums! Join us to reply in threads, receive reduced ads, and to customize your site experience!
Is this odd?
- Thread starter PearlJammzz
- Start date
- Joined
- Apr 21, 2007
- Location
- Yorktown, VA
perfectly normal ..... my Q6600 @ 2.4GHz (vcore 1.05V) reaches an idle 25C and load 32C.
http://www.ocforums.com/showthread.php?t=520284
http://www.ocforums.com/showthread.php?t=520284
- Joined
- Apr 21, 2007
- Location
- Yorktown, VA
When did you buy your B3? The latest B3's seem to OC almost as well or as well as the G0's and some have low VID too.
- Joined
- Nov 26, 2005
- Location
- Concord, NC
Only 1 way to find out! In general the G0's have been OCing better than the B3's, but some of the later B3's are not too shabby.
Personally, if I could trade it for a G0 for free I'd do it. But you might as well see what the B3 can do first since it's already in your PC.
- Joined
- Nov 28, 2001
- Location
- in a magical field
When checking VID be sure to do it under load, if you have Speedstep and C1E enabled the VID in Coretemp will change at idle.
- Joined
- Jun 6, 2002
the VID in coretemp wont change, thats intels tested voltaged needed to insure the cpu runs at rated speed. just be cause he disables C1E isnt going to change that, C1E state drops it to 1v in juction with EIST to lower power usage. coretemp doesnt report voltages like CPU-z or MBM does.
Last edited:
Only thing wrong with RightMark is that it does not properly show the VID's on Allendale CPU's. For instance, I've used numerous E4300's and E4400's and RightMark always shows 1.2125v but the overclockable motherboard and CoreTemp show 1.325v. The differential seems to be 0.1125v. It seems to work fine in displaying the correct VID's with Pentium4, PentiumD, and Core 2 Duo Conroe's.
As another example, here is an E4500 and if you compare CoreTemp and RightMark the differntial is once again 0.1125v
As another example, here is an E4500 and if you compare CoreTemp and RightMark the differntial is once again 0.1125v
Last edited:
- Joined
- Nov 15, 2005
- Location
- Camarillo, CA!
thats normal... i run my E6600 (stock 2.4ghz) @ 3.0ghz (25%oc) at 1.225v fully stable... when stock vid is 1.325 (so a 10% undervolt).
And at 3ghz the diff between stock vid and 1.225v is like 6-7*C
And at 3ghz the diff between stock vid and 1.225v is like 6-7*C
That's fine to run your CPU at a lower voltage but the point is that there's only one original VID and CoreTemp displays the correct one with Allendale's more acurately than Right Mark.
- Joined
- Jun 6, 2002
coretemp has had more time to perfect the reading of the VID in the cpu. Rightmark hasnt offered the reading of the cpu's VID as long as coretemp has. thats what im thinking is the case here with rightmark. either that or they just use the standard lowest voltage used. cause with C1E the voltage is suppose to drop to either 1v or 1.1v, i think they might be using that. its a guessing game really, unless we can get someone who programed RM to tell us.
Evil, I always respect & value your post here, but this is just too weak for argument.
If that is your base for trusting coretemp more than RM especially for VID's issue, then what is this HERE ? Just keep scrolling to the bottom and start reading from bottom to above and find on when did VID support started for Intel platform.
FYI, RM Clock Utility has been evolved and exist since year 2002.
I assume you aware when Coretemp was released for the 1st time right ?
Because I've always known motherboards to be correct at reading the VID and the Gigabyte board that I'm using also reports the VID's in line with what CoreTemp shows. Once again, I like RightMark and have used it a lot before and I have only seen this issue with Allendale(2MB cache) CPU's.
- Joined
- Jun 6, 2002
while that clock util has been out for a while yes i know that, its ability to detect the VID is what is in question. right? thats what i was refering to not its ability to detect clock speeds. From what i have see RM clock util has not had the option to read/show the cpu's VID. Coretemp has been showing/reading the vid far longer then RM, thats what im saying. in not debating how long either program has been around. Like i also stated though maybe the people who programed RM use intels always low VID when C1E state is enabled. we wont know till we can ask a programer.
*edit*
i read that list and most of the VID reading in there showed it was add for P4 around aug2005. most of the other stated about VID had to do with mobile cpus. im still reading it, started from the bottom up wards, i havent seen anything about added VID reading from new cpu's.
*edit2*
well i just thought of this, if someone has a older verision of Rm to use and compare it to Coretemp to see if the vid's are off. since there is a change log where they add P4 vid reading if i read that chang log correctly. we could use coretemp to compare and even the new RM, would need to be the same P4 cpu in question.
*edit3*
ok so that one argument i agree is weak but what about the others. the only other thoughts then i keep going to are that they are use the C1E states that intel has publish in white papers. Maybe coolest has a intel contact that helped him develope the reading of the vid, as well i still go back that we need to ask a programer or someone in the company that knows.
*edit*
i read that list and most of the VID reading in there showed it was add for P4 around aug2005. most of the other stated about VID had to do with mobile cpus. im still reading it, started from the bottom up wards, i havent seen anything about added VID reading from new cpu's.
*edit2*
well i just thought of this, if someone has a older verision of Rm to use and compare it to Coretemp to see if the vid's are off. since there is a change log where they add P4 vid reading if i read that chang log correctly. we could use coretemp to compare and even the new RM, would need to be the same P4 cpu in question.
*edit3*
ok so that one argument i agree is weak but what about the others. the only other thoughts then i keep going to are that they are use the C1E states that intel has publish in white papers. Maybe coolest has a intel contact that helped him develope the reading of the vid, as well i still go back that we need to ask a programer or someone in the company that knows.
Last edited:
- Joined
- Jun 6, 2002
lets get a SS going in this thread, compare the vid of RM to coretemp. the one thing that keeps standing out to me is the vid in Rm is the voltage used by C1E state, when the cpu is at idle. ill get mine later tonight, who is gonna start it off for us?
Similar threads
