X2 3800 Manchester/Toledo

[Blkout]

What is your problem, I did not claim to be stable at 1.48v I said it would be stable at somewhere between 1.48v and 1.52 if I remenber correctly, and that I was still testing. Why the hell would I lie about how high I can overclock at a certain voltage, I couldn't care less how you feel about my overclock, but I do care when you insult me in such way when I haven't said anything that you claim I have. Nobody thought that with the current 90nm process that a k8 would overclock to 3.0ghz with acceptable voltages, but then the Opterons became available for s939 and many of them reached 3.0ghz, my point is sometimes there are chips that are a little better then others.

I don't feel anything about your overlock, its just that when you posted what you were getting at a FAR lower voltage the average for that clock speed, a red flag went up and I had to question what you were using take these measurements. Now I know, and I realize that you are giving that chip more voltage than you originally stated. Its not your fault you didn't know, I was just correcting you so that no one is mislead. The clock speed you are getting at around 1.55v actual is more along the lines of what others are getting.

 

[deathman20]

You cannot trust any of the onboard sensors, even the BIOS can be off some. My point was that CPU-Z or CPUID is often .5v off, and its always lower than the actual CPU voltage.

You mean .05V not .5V more on the CPU would fry it under most cases.

 

[Blkout]

You mean .05V not .5V more on the CPU would fry it under most cases.

If you go back and read the post again, you will see it has been corrected already.

 

[martinjon666]

Not nearly to 2.8 but ifeel i gave my chip a good run so far, i am leaning towards more voltage and different memory to get higher

 

[martinjon666]

can't get that darn image to work

 

[Rattle]

thats exactly where I am at with mine 10X260 1.5v

idles 30c load 40c

 

[martinjon666]

well hell has already frozen over (idaho) if i keep my windows to my computer room open i can get idle temps about 20

 

[martinjon666]

oh yeah my stepping is CDBHE

 

[Avg]

I don't feel anything about your overlock, its just that when you posted what you were getting at a FAR lower voltage the average for that clock speed, a red flag went up and I had to question what you were using take these measurements. Now I know, and I realize that you are giving that chip more voltage than you originally stated. Its not your fault you didn't know, I was just correcting you so that no one is mislead. The clock speed you are getting at around 1.55v actual is more along the lines of what others are getting.

So, what about those people that have used more voltage then I, have you asked them how they measured their voltage? If all of them are using the same measuring method that I am, then it is pointless if I'm running more voltage then I realize because all of the other people are also using less voltage. Also if CPu-z and other monitoring applications were always reading less voltage then it is really going through, whoever made the application could easily increase .05 from the reading it is getting.

 

[donv]

My X2 3800+
Running dual prime with 1.45v in BIOS (about that in real life, actually, DMM measured) at 2600mhz, trying to do some burn in. Already down from 1.475 at these mhz, so we're making progess. I'd like 2700mhz with 1.5v for 24/7 usage.
At the moment, needs about 1.55v to do 2.7ghz, 1.67v to do 2.8ghz, seems to scale linearly.

 

[Npetune3000]

my X2 3800+ manchester is at 2.6ghz. It can do 2.7, but it freezes if i do anything too straining. I'm wondering if its my PSU because I have a lot of things installed.
I guess I should try a burn in.

 

[dropadrop]

I don't feel anything about your overlock, its just that when you posted what you were getting at a FAR lower voltage the average for that clock speed, a red flag went up and I had to question what you were using take these measurements. Now I know, and I realize that you are giving that chip more voltage than you originally stated. Its not your fault you didn't know, I was just correcting you so that no one is mislead. The clock speed you are getting at around 1.55v actual is more along the lines of what others are getting.

Seems more like you are on some kind of a mission

Cpu-z is a program just about everyone here uses for verifying clockspeed (and vcore). You are complaining that what he was showing will give people are wrong impression, but the people are using the same program for their own monitoring which should negate the differance (according to your logic).

You are bitching about Avg calling his overclock stable, when he in reality said he is hoping to get it stable.

Get a grip.

 

[renegade44]

Seems more like you are on some kind of a mission

Cpu-z is a program just about everyone here uses for verifying clockspeed (and vcore). You are complaining that what he was showing will give people are wrong impression, but the people are using the same program for their own monitoring which should negate the differance (according to your logic).

You are bitching about Avg calling his overclock stable, when he in reality said he is hoping to get it stable.

Get a grip.

I had the same take on Avg calling his overclock stable,that he wasn't. Even wrote a flame for Blkout and changed my mind, wanted to take the high road.

 

[donv]

Seems more like you are on some kind of a mission

Cpu-z is a program just about everyone here uses for verifying clockspeed (and vcore). You are complaining that what he was showing will give people are wrong impression, but the people are using the same program for their own monitoring which should negate the differance (according to your logic).

You are bitching about Avg calling his overclock stable, when he in reality said he is hoping to get it stable.

Get a grip.

Thing is, CPU-Z doesn't even show an obvious pattern for detecting vcore, on the DFI NF4. It shows 1.55v to be the same as 1.5x110%, which it obviously isn't (proven by OC and DMM). You cannot use CPU-Z to quote your voltage, as it is just totally unreliable. The best is to use a multimeter, and the second best is what the BIOS is set to.

 

[Avg]

Thing is, CPU-Z doesn't even show an obvious pattern for detecting vcore, on the DFI NF4. It shows 1.55v to be the same as 1.5x110%, which it obviously isn't (proven by OC and DMM). You cannot use CPU-Z to quote your voltage, as it is just totally unreliable. The best is to use a multimeter, and the second best is what the BIOS is set to.

Some board undervolt and others overvolt, and it is usually a pattern through out the same series of mobo that use the same pcb. Some boards that I've had this happen with me was the NF7-s which I had four of and all of which undervolted by about .05 on all of the boards, then I got the AN7 and it set the votlages perfectly. Another socket a board that I had previously to any of the abit ones was the gigabyte ga-7N400-L1 which overvolted just a bit. I've used cpu-z, smart guardian and many other monitoring software and all of them showed the same readings. I just don't get why you guys are so upset with me when I clearly stated that it would be stable between 1.48v and 1.52v, then I just posted the 1.48v screenshot because that just happened to be the voltage I was testing.

 

[dropadrop]

My main point was, that everybody is using software to monitor vcore when they are posting their overclocks. It's purely pointless to start complaining, when the only other option (as far as I'm aware) would be to use a multimeter to calibrate.

It's not like this is a friggin competition, or people are reporting record braking overclocks where this kind of speculation might actually be appropriate. If you want to moan, atleast do it in a constructive manner.

 

[downer]

Here is a Screenshot of my newly purchased X2 3800+ (Toledo core). $118 at newegg.

3.0ghz @ 1.5V

Stepping Code:

LCBKE 0643TPMW
Y

I'll be testing stability with orthos tonight. I think I finally got lucky enough to get a great clocking cpu.

**UPDATE** Orthos ran fine for 7hrs at 3.0ghz, going to test 1.45V right now

 

[downer]

3ghz 12hr orthos stable at 1.45V

 

[-_{MoW}_-Assasi]

Wow... 3 Ghz... I couldnt manage to get my old one stable at 2.8 with 1.6v


Anyhow, I had a E6 Toledo (Dead now) running at

2.7 Ghz (285 x 9.5) @ 1.52v
CCBWE
Week 29 2005

 

[Rattle]

damn old *** thread revived nicely
sweet chip !