FRONTPAGE Ivy Bridge Temperatures - It's Gettin' Hot in Here

EarthDog said:

+ 1 Archer...

...this is the first platform where offset is more useful (for me personally it served to confuse more so than anything). For overclocking, I would still disable power features until you are stable, THEN re-enable them.

Click to expand...

amlett said:

Hi guys.

I've done a little review about the 3770K TIM replacement. The original is in spanish, but here are the results:

7 3770K L152B693
Asus Maximus V GENE Z77
2x4GB Samsung 30nm green 1600 @ 2133 C10 1.5v
Samsung 830 1280GB
Corsair H100 + 2x Nidec Gentle Thypoon 1450rpm 51cmf (solo Push)

Artic Silver 5
Artic MX4
Prolimatech pk-1
Coolaboratory Liquid Pro
índigo Xtreme

Ambient temp 23-24ºC





Here the full review at Noticias3D:

http://foro.noticias3d.com/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=391334

bye!

Click to expand...

Archer0915 said:

The issue I see is people turning off power management, setting the voltage at 1.2 or 1.3 instead of using the dynamic offset. This is not a SB and should not be treated as such. The days of just upping the volts and multi to get a great OC are going away for this CPU.

Click to expand...

rge said:

I would disagree with the upping volts and multi going away, our mobos must have very different implementations.

I am prime 12+ hrs, linx (newest) max mem stable at 4.7 with 1.31vcore, and max temps 85C linx. And zero idle bsods or whea errors. According to fluke reading vcore, I need 1.305 vcore but I run 1 notch above stable testing, ie 1.311v. I can use LLC on turbo or high and adjust vcore accordingly but as long as vcore remains 1.305 or above, Im stable. That overclock was easy and straightforward and temps are fine. And power savings would save me $2 per year with my use (for that 20W several hrs per day), and I dont use them. Sleep mode on other hand saves me over 300W, that I use.

Now look at dynamic vcore (first without power savings). If I set vcore to normal 1.16 on mine and add .140 vcore dynamic, and boot at 35 multi I get 1.16 vcore. At 40 multi gives me 1.26 vcore, and at 47 multi gives me 1.39 vcore. Basically it overvolts, like auto overclocking with higher multi. Now I add power savings, and it overvolts at load, and I get idle bsods because it undervolts at idle/low load. I have played around and got it semistable, but at cost of still higher vcore than necessary at full load, or idle bsods when lowering vcore so load appropriate. There are multiple posts with idle bsod issues from people using power saving and dynamic vid, where mhz scales up faster than vcore.

I could probably get it stable manipulating LLC, some of power features turned off, etc but would take weeks to test for idle bsods, and what a colossal waste of time, especially when it is easy, straightforward, and better temps on mine, to up multi and vcore.

As an aside, I can run prime/linx all day with dynamic vcore + power savings, since load is always high enough (even linx) to maintain high enough vcore....but idle bsods then have to be tested and adjustments made.

Some people prefer dynamic, Im not a fan yet.

Click to expand...

rge said:

I would disagree with the upping volts and multi going away, our mobos must have very different implementations.

I am prime 12+ hrs, linx (newest) max mem stable at 4.7 with 1.31vcore, and max temps 85C linx. And zero idle bsods or whea errors. According to fluke reading vcore, I need 1.305 vcore but I run 1 notch above stable testing, ie 1.311v. I can use LLC on turbo or high and adjust vcore accordingly but as long as vcore remains 1.305 or above, Im stable. That overclock was easy and straightforward and temps are fine. And power savings would save me $2 per year with my use (for that 20W several hrs per day), and I dont use them. Sleep mode on other hand saves me over 300W, that I use.

Now look at dynamic vcore (first without power savings). If I set vcore to normal 1.16 on mine and add .140 vcore dynamic, and boot at 35 multi I get 1.16 vcore. At 40 multi gives me 1.26 vcore, and at 47 multi gives me 1.39 vcore. Basically it overvolts, like auto overclocking with higher multi. Now I add power savings, and it overvolts at load, and I get idle bsods because it undervolts at idle/low load. I have played around and got it semistable, but at cost of still higher vcore than necessary at full load, or idle bsods when lowering vcore so load appropriate. There are multiple posts with idle bsod issues from people using power saving and dynamic vid, where mhz scales up faster than vcore.

I could probably get it stable manipulating LLC, some of power features turned off, etc but would take weeks to test for idle bsods, and what a colossal waste of time, especially when it is easy, straightforward, and better temps on mine, to up multi and vcore.

As an aside, I can run prime/linx all day with dynamic vcore + power savings, since load is always high enough (even linx) to maintain high enough vcore....but idle bsods then have to be tested and adjustments made.

Some people prefer dynamic, Im not a fan yet.

Click to expand...

hokiealumnus said:

Pretty much +1 to rge. Also on water.

Click to expand...

ktownhero said:

My LLC setting for my Asrock Z77 Extreme4 has 5 levels. Level 1 being no vdroop, level 5 being max vdroop. Right now, I keep it at level 3 so I get some droop but nothing extreme.

What are the thoughts here on whether it makes more sense to run a higher offset with more vdroop versus getting rid of vdroop altogether and running a lower offset? Are there advantages/disadvantages for either method?

Click to expand...

Archer0915 said:

With these chips? Who knows and there are two (or more) schools of thought there as well.

Locked voltage with droop or dynamic with no droop are two.

Click to expand...

hokiealumnus said:

Very good points Archer. I just haven't had time to try your way (or with an air cooler really). Not saying it's bad by any stretch, it's just not my preference.

Click to expand...

However, our findings are significant, as they can affect users who may not even know they are running an SSD with the brakes on. In short: really fast SSDs that can deliver 200 MB/s or even more of throughput become limited by CPU performance due to power saving mechanisms—or more precisely, they are bottlenecked by a limited availability of CPU time. This became obvious by switching the various power saving options on and off. We found that the sophisticated power saving mechanisms—such as the Active State Power Management for PCI Express, or the deeper C states that switch off entire functional units within the CPU at a transistor level—have a noticeable impact on the performance of our X25-E flash SSD. Obviously, the latency added by utilizing the more complex power saving features is significant enough to have to wait for the system to pick up data.

Click to expand...

I.M.O.G. said:

Probably nothing. On most desktops, the power is configured the same for the CPU in savings and maximum performance I think. On a laptop, it may be more common to configure the CPU to use something less than its max power.

On a desktop, I would expect the only difference between the default profile and max performance to be in peripherals... Disk, monitor, and sleep/hibernation settings.

Click to expand...