- Joined
- Jan 12, 2012
Christ I don't even think I would be able to boot into windows at the Cpu V, nice board!
-
Welcome to Overclockers Forums! Join us to reply in threads, receive reduced ads, and to customize your site experience!
Opinions on ASRock 990FX Extreme9 MoBo?
- Thread starter Blaylock
- Start date
- Joined
- Dec 19, 2012
Heres a few shots ...
I'm still curious what HWmonitor would report when the system is under full load. Not syaing you're making things up, this just seems too good to be true! What settings are you using for LLC??
- Joined
- Aug 5, 2010
- Location
- Michigan
LLC is at 25 [ASRock LLC is backwards to others] and under top heavy load it hit 1.55 top. 60c core temp max. Trust me I was like no way also, to good to be true thing also. Now I can start playin with it again, wasnt fun before. But before I had to go 75 and 1.53 v and it went from 1.50 to 1.57, I tried everything but only way it would hold before stable. Temps were no problem with WC, but didnt like havin it up that high.
Last edited:
- Joined
- Jan 12, 2012
So it's hitting 1.55 Cpu v under load, with the Asrock Ext 9 board?
- Joined
- Aug 5, 2010
- Location
- Michigan
Yes
- Joined
- Jan 12, 2012
Well that explains it! You may want to drop at LLC a bit then raise the Cpu V so there isn't such a dramatic jump in volts under load.
- Joined
- Dec 19, 2012
For a minute there I thought you really got lucky. I can run prime at 1.428 with my 9370.
View attachment 134234
1.55v under load sounds a bit high but a lot more reasonable. It is certainly possible that there is a CPU out there that would run that low.
View attachment 134234
1.55v under load sounds a bit high but a lot more reasonable. It is certainly possible that there is a CPU out there that would run that low.
- Joined
- Aug 5, 2010
- Location
- Michigan
ok, I know what I'm doin, but I dont know everything, if you get my meaning, I'm goin by research and what I ve read, I thought It was suppose to be that way? ASRock suggets disabling LLC for overclocks but way to big a jump with it off. So im confused a little now. I get what your sayin, Its what I did before, I thought I was wrong in settin it that way, I was forcin it. Also runnin better, cooler. Educate me bud, if u want. I'm serious, never went to school for, so its all what ive taught myself or read.
- Joined
- Aug 5, 2010
- Location
- Michigan
Ya I'm not braggin at all, never entered my mind, just spreadin worth while info I thought ....
- Joined
- Dec 19, 2012
If you want to run that OC then I would suggest getting the voltage down as far as you can and like Manny said not such a big jump, that can cause a crash as well. Once you're stable you can use AMD's own power saving features to keep the clocks and volts down when surfing etc. Just takes a lot of tinkering and time,
- Joined
- Aug 5, 2010
- Location
- Michigan
What are u guys gettin under load with ur saber boards?
- Joined
- Aug 5, 2010
- Location
- Michigan
Time I got, disabled, home every day ...lol. But I can work with it now. O I really wanted the CHV-Z board, but being on disabilty I had to be practical, the 150 for mine was practical. Long story short they made the BIOS better ..... LOL Thanks guys.
- Joined
- Dec 19, 2012
I never tried for 4.8 with my 8350 did 4.9 once and the voltage was 1.58 to keep it stable. That's why I only ran it at 4.64 with 1.476v seemed a lot more reasonable. The pic I posted is my 9370 and it's an exceptional chip at that speed.
I'm usually kicking around the most between 7am and 3pm EST and I'll help you out not a problem.
- Thread Starter
- #54
Hmm, maybe that's why I'm pushing 1.5v to hit 4.0Ghz. I'm set to 75%. So you think I should try 25% instead? maybe drop my volts down to 1.475v?
EDIT: def gonna flash to new BIOS this week though.
- Joined
- Dec 19, 2012
I never had one of the 6 cores blaylock but that's what I need for my 965 to hit 4.0
- Joined
- Aug 5, 2010
- Location
- Michigan
Ya my main objective once I flashed bios was to get it back runnin where I had it set, works great for my games ect. But now that they have voltages under control I can start playin with too, Ive had mine at 5.0 prime stable, just didnt like the volts, and didnt gain anything in gaming, the ones I play I got same performance 4.8, 5.0 no difference, so waste of juice and gained heat. And when I tried 25 before with 4.8 i believe it hit 1.60 if i remember right, why i had to resort too 75 and 1.53. Ill be playin with it alot now to see what i can come up with. It also had a bug where i couldnt change NB off 2200 when i ran my memory at 2133, it locked it in somehow, but now thats fixed also, I'm thinkin they rushed it out door a little too fast before more R&D was needed but at least they did somethin about it, clap hands for that. And Johan45 thanks bud, and back at ya, Im always around ..lol Just not on site but I pop in to read alot, couple times a week easy.
- Joined
- Aug 5, 2010
- Location
- Michigan
I had a stubborn 965 in wifes pc now, but I had to go 1.55 for it to hit 4.0. There was no way around it, I tried forever and 2 different boards. But as long as you keep cool it didnt hurt it, was like that for 3 years goin strong, put back a little to 3.8 for wifes pc.
- Joined
- Feb 13, 2010
- Location
- Missouri
Al modified OCZ cryoz.
- Thread Starter
- #60
OK, so BIOS is updated to P1.50 now. I'm not super familiar with Load Line Calibration as this is my first board with it. However, I was able to get Game Stable 4.0Ghz @ 1.4875 which is 1 bump down for me. As far as LLC goes, with Vcore @ 1.4875 and LLC@25% my Max CPUv hit 1.568v under load (Tomb Raider). With same vCore and LLC@75% Max CPUv was 1.504v under same load. Not sure if that makes it backwards from all other boards but I clearly want a higher LLC.
P.S. incase you were wondering why I didn't check prime stable, it's because my Cooler is inadequate for 6Core full load @ 1.5v.
P.S. incase you were wondering why I didn't check prime stable, it's because my Cooler is inadequate for 6Core full load @ 1.5v.
