Sentential03's burn in's really do work for me.

[amd_luvarboi]

How can you shun darwin yet hail technology? that's just so strange like only christians can be lol.

 

[enduro]

Have an update. I tried going the Mhz route instead of low voltage to see what I can hit. I was doing 13*200 at 1.85V, and it would fail immediately. After burning all night, it lasted 20 mins. I'm burning it in at 200*12.5 at 1.725V right now, just going back and forth.

 

[mnew]

ok, I couldnt go through 5 pages, so I have some questions. what do I do? on the first page it seems that there is no need for the cpu burn-in program, and that you just lower the vcore and prime as long as possible, and repeat it over and over again. exactly where does the cpu burn-in program come in?

 

[deception``]

ok, I couldnt go through 5 pages, so I have some questions. what do I do? on the first page it seems that there is no need for the cpu burn-in program, and that you just lower the vcore and prime as long as possible, and repeat it over and over again. exactly where does the cpu burn-in program come in?

You will find no in-depth explanation in this thread. Such a procedure has been dicussed many times throughout a number of forums. Trust me when I say that the search button is your friend. Additionally, please post your computer specs in your signature (see mine, for example) so we can help you better.

deception``

 

[ïß®äHïM]

I'm trying a different method of 'burning-in' the CPU, would this work?

I looked for the lowest vcore i can run at @ stock speeds (200*10), which fails prime within a few minutes. It was 1.33v, which first failed Small FFTs in 3 mins.

Ran CPU burn-in for 4-6 hrs, prime runs for 56 mins. Currently doing another round of burning in with just over the 10 hr mark, running prime tmr, will update how long it runs later.

Would this increased stability at stock speeds also affect higher clock speeds which was unstable before?

I resorted to this procedure cos i'm having a terrible temp problem. Even at this very low vcore of 1.33v, i get 35-45c of CPU temp, with the SLK900 and tornado.. (Runnin CPU Burn-in with max heat generation). At 1.7v, my stable voltage previously (could be lower now) for 2400MHz, i get 46c idle, 54c load..

 

[mnew]

well I dont have a specific cpu to use it on, I just want to know where the cpu Burn-In program comes into play. I see that you lower the voltage and prime as long as possible, and stuff like that, until you get good results, but do you burn-in before lowering the voltage, everytime before priming? when? thats all, thanks

 

[enduro]

Nope, you lower the voltage to where Prime fails in about 5 mins or so, and then you use the burn in program (on the first page) for 6-10 hrs, and then re Prime the overclock to see if it is stable. I'd recommend that you read the thread though, because many threads in this forum are long, so you might as well get used to it. Some are 30-40 pgs long.

But yeah, the burn in program is used to stress the cpu without error testing, while I'm not sure if you can turn the prime error testing off, so you use Prime to see how far your stability has increased.

 

[Zebbo]

Works for me, I used Burn-In for 4 hours and my Prime usual stopped after ~20mins with 1,55Vcore and 2500MHz (3500+ NewCastle) now it lasts as long as 6 hours and 38 mins.

 

[mnew]

ok, so prime95 doesnt actually help, it just shows if the stability has increased. ok, just to make sure I got it. theoreticaly speaking, say I have an amd athlon xp barton @ 2400mhz @ 1.8 volts. It is completely stable. the point at which it will boot into windows and can run prime95 for 5 minutes tops is 1.6 volts. I run the burn-in with my cpu @ 1.8 volts for several hours(is just running it overnight fine?) then I reboot and set the voltage to 1.6, prime it, and see if I last longer? thanks

 

[Helsyeah]

ok, so prime95 doesnt actually help, it just shows if the stability has increased. ok, just to make sure I got it. theoreticaly speaking, say I have an amd athlon xp barton @ 2400mhz @ 1.8 volts. It is completely stable. the point at which it will boot into windows and can run prime95 for 5 minutes tops is 1.6 volts. I run the burn-in with my cpu @ 1.8 volts for several hours(is just running it overnight fine?) then I reboot and set the voltage to 1.6, prime it, and see if I last longer? thanks

Actually run CPUBurn @ 1.6v with error detection disabled overnight then run prime @ 1.6v and see if it has increased the amount of time it would run.

 

[enduro]

Yeah, you need to burn it in at the lowest voltage you can boot into Windows with without a random restart. So burn in your theoretical cpu at 1.6V

 

[Avg]

How can you shun darwin yet hail technology? that's just so strange like only christians can be lol.

Just so you know only 12% of Americans believe that Darwin is right, and that seems like a personal attack to me. It's up to you what you believe in, if rather think that you are an evolved monkey it's up to you.

 

[felinusz]

deception``

You will find no in-depth explanation in this thread.

That's not true. I'll repeat, and condense, what Sentential has already said (and he's said it several times...):


1. Overclock your CPU as high as you can with full stability (maximum stable MHz).

2. Bring the Vcore voltage down as low as you can, without compromising Windows (able to run Windows without crashing, or about 2-5 minutes of Prime95 torture testing before erroring).

3. Run the Prime95 torture testing, and record how long your unstable overclock ran Prime95 torture testing before erroring.

4. Run the program CPU Burn-in, with error checking disabled, for at least 8 hours using the same unstable, but Windows capable, settings you just used for the Prime95 test.

5. After the 8+ hour CPU Burn-in session, run Prime95 torture testing again, still with the same unstable settings. Record the amount of time Prime95 torture testing runs before erroring.

6. After several CPU Burn-in sessions, you should see a signifigant increase in the amount of time your unstable overclock will run Prime95 torture testing - your CPU is becoming more responsive to voltage. In other words, your CPU's MHz Gain : Vcore Overvolt ratio is improving.

7. After multiple CPU Burn-in sessions, if results (results being increased Prime95 torture testing run-times before erroring) are good, lower the Vcore another notch, so that your overclock is once again barely able to run Windows (or, about 2-5 minutes of Prime95 before erroring).

8. Repeat the above untill you no longer see gains, or you've reached your MHz:Vcore goal.


Somebody please correct me if I made a mistake; but I think that's pretty much *exactly* what Sentential has said about his burn-in technique (more than once) in this thread.

Pretty in-depth.

 

[enduro]

Go Felinusz

Felinusz has taken over the thread with his superior sticky making power

 

[deception``]

You will find no in-depth explanation in this thread. Such a procedure has been dicussed many times throughout a number of forums. Trust me when I say that the search button is your friend. Additionally, please post your computer specs in your signature (see mine, for example) so we can help you better.

deception``

The first comment was sarcasm more than anything. I am well aware of the method to which Sentential discussed. However, I also feel that more comprehensive explanations of burn-in have been posted both on the internet and forums alike. For most people, sentential's post was more than sufficient; for others, it still raises some questions. Obviously if his post was truly as in-depth as you claim it to be then there should be no reason for another member to make any further inquiries. Nonetheless, it would be pretty senseless to continue this discussion further and leave the questions of others unanswered. For more information on CPU Burn-In, click here.

deception``

 

[Sentential]

Go Felinusz

Felinusz has taken over the thread with his superior sticky making power

I appreciate it bro... I take it you guys want me to make a sticky thread now?

 

[enduro]

You might, but I'd wait for some good results from the burning in first. You could post some of the results at the beginning of the sticky so people actually believe you :cough: deception :cough:

 

[deception``]

You might, but I'd wait for some good results from the burning in first. You could post some of the results at the beginning of the sticky so people actually believe you :cough: deception :cough:

There are many people who doubt this process besides myself. A debate on this particular topic could go on for hours in the same manner as one discussing the "benefits" of Prime 95. With all due respect, I am in no way out to proove everybody's theories wrong; on the contrary, I simply offered my opinion on the manner. Nevertheless, need I remind you once again that this process is not as common as it seems; therefore, I am not the only one who doubts its potential. With this in mind, please do not make it seem as if I am simply here to challenge the ideas of others as it is not the case.

deception``

 

[Rich Avery]

I'm still in the process of finding the lowest burn inable vcore for 2.54ghz. I think it's around 1.85 atm. The thing is someone said earlier that running more than 1.9vcore isn't recommended!!

The thing is believe it or not, I'm running 220x11.5 and 1.92 idle [1.95 in bios] and my idle temp is now 24.5'c lol. Granted, it's alot cooler here in the uk atm and i'm bringing that cool air in directly onto my CPU with a crazy vent and fan sytem but still it idle's 30-35 normally.
So I wouldn't mind seeing how high it can go seen as my temps are so low. So does high vcore really matter if i'm idling at such low temps. Would 2.2vcore at 2.9ghz for example melt my cpu even if i'm idling with those settings at 40'c!!????

 

[enduro]

Are those temps on air? If you can keep your temps in the 40's, then from the thread a while back, you should be good up to 2V or so. 2.1 might be good, but definitely make sure that your temps stay in the low 40's when you are at 2V. It's when you get toward 50°C that you start causing damage to your cpu. Personally though, I'd stay below 2V on air, even cold air. It's just safer that way.