I have been going over and over my OC trying different combinations.
It looks like 170 is prime stable at ~1.344V. Temps are great, 28 idle (doesn't count for much, and Highs of 70). I could got with 180 bclk, but I would have to go 1.45V and until I hear about others risking their chips or I go WC, I will stick with 170. Also like you have pointed out wickedout my 8 gigs of ram might possibly also be holding me back from 180, I will try that out this weekend.
I did a 3DMark06 Run last night with 170X20 Turbo/EIST Enabled, GTX260/216 at 650/1150 and got a score of 18360, That blows away most Q6600s, with a score of ~14000, but I averaged out the top 20 Q6600s with 260s and from 3.2-3.8GHz the average score was like 11500. So even until we figure out a trick to get higher Bclk, the i5 is still almost 1.6X faster then a Q6600, unless somone dropped a 400 dollar Water Kit in to OC it over 4.0.
Well, I don't know what to make of this......though CAS increased, voltage and speed of rams were reduced with 2 bclk increament ran just about the same as it was 185bclk, higher voltage and lower CAS.
The differences that I've noticed are: WEI knocked off from 7.8 previously to 7.7 for ram rating since speed was reduced.
Super PI 1M finished a tad sooner.
Encoding video finished about the same.
Temperatures are very consitent as previous. Sytem idles temp is very low and quite.
...and a bragging right of 4.50GHz Turbo .......Cheers
But at what Bclk? See my 8GB of RAM and slower ram speed both put me at a disadvantage. I can only hit about 170 Bclk with all Power saving options turned on. Even then my CPU gets hotter under load, but is cooler at idle. 175 is kind of pushing it, so in reality, with Turbo and power saving options turned on my OC isn't as fast. Especially for benching purposes. My 3DMark06 Scores are about 2000 pts. different.
I have actually had mine running at 4.4, but its definitely not Prime stable. I was at about 1.492V Vcore and didn't want to run up into the 1.5s as I have been reading thats not so good even though I know its possible and not kill the chip. I am trying to keep my clocks all below 1.45V
I've ran this Cinebench R10 last week at
21*182bclk | Dram 1.64 SPD10 1820MHz 999-24
Well, from what I understand is that a lot of applications out there for everyday usage do not really utilize all 4 cores. So, by shutting down 3 or 2 cores and boost the other cores at higher speed which helps a lot.
Depending on the processor model and several other variables, the processor will dynamically overclock one or more of its processing cores to boost its performance. The amount of overclocking performed is determined by an algorithm that takes into account these factors :
Processor Model - different processors have different limits on the amount of overclocking allowed
Number Of Active Cores - the amount of overclocking for each active core depends on the number of active cores.
Power Delivery Limit - the amount of power the processor can draw from the motherboard
Estimated Processor Current Draw
Estimated Processor Power Consumption
Processor Temperature When the Intel Turbo Boost Technology is engaged, the processor will continuously monitor its current draw, power consumption and temperature. If they are all below Intel's pre-set limits, then the processor will automatically increase the clock speed of the active cores in steps (speed bins) of 133 MHz up till the upper limit allowed by the processor model.
Really interesting. Any you're using the P55-UD3R right?
I tested like this a little with my i5 750 on the UD3R and maxed out at 165MHz (170 would not get into Windows).
I think your boosted core is very stong Mine was not so much.
I could run much higher, but I had to manually change Vcore which prevented C1E from functioning, and really negated any real bennefit.
Without these features, I was able to get my CPU stable at 4.4GHz WITH ALL FOUR CORES! So, I didn't really see the point in continuing to try with the power saving features enabled.
I guess what I'm saying is this is really cool stuff, and you have a great CPU!
But for someone who wants maximum performance in all apps (not just ones that use onle 1 or 2 cores), then OCing without these feautres would be preferred.
Someone who wants lower tempratures, lower voltages, and more power saving should give this a shot, and see if their mobo/CPU/MEM are up to it
Really interesting. Any you're using the P55-UD3R right?
I tested like this a little with my i5 750 on the UD3R and maxed out at 165MHz (170 would not get into Windows).
I think your boosted core is very stong Mine was not so much.
I could run much higher, but I had to manually change Vcore which prevented C1E from functioning, and really negated any real bennefit.
Without these features, I was able to get my CPU stable at 4.4GHz WITH ALL FOUR CORES! So, I didn't really see the point in continuing to try with the power saving features enabled.
I guess what I'm saying is this is really cool stuff, and you have a great CPU!
But for someone who wants maximum performance in all apps (not just ones that use onle 1 or 2 cores), then OCing without these feautres would be preferred.
Someone who wants lower tempratures, lower voltages, and more power saving should give this a shot, and see if their mobo/CPU/MEM are up to it
That's the point. Yes, it's an overclockers's dream be able to maximize speed with lower heat, voltage and efficient at the same time.
I've read your post long before I even had this system. Interestingly enough is that we both have the same board and cpu but with differences when using Turboboost.
I was able got it up to 4.4GHz manually but inexperience to get it stable with gross amount of vcore. Here, I'm comfortable at 185bblck with boost similar to straight ocing 4.4GHz with less of hefty weight.
Thanks for your inputs and I'm always looking out for that great comparision at various bclk speeds, heat, voltage efficiency tested in a variety of applications with Turboboost ON/OFF
Those two benches above are from the system with the same rams were used?
What rams are those?
What kind of Dram voltage did you use for 787-20 setting?
I have to ask a very specific question. Are you making your settings in Bios or Using Easy Tune (similar type program) to change settings after you are in Windows?
I can boot into windows at 175 Bclk, Turbo, Power Saving Functions Enabled. From there I can get to 182 Bclk using EasyTune to tweak settings. Pass small FFTs in Prime and Run iterations of SuperPi.
The problem is if I try to use the same settings in the Bios, I can not get past Windows Log in without BSOD. Any of the settings I use from say 177-182 with the Vcore/Vtt settings I was using while using EasyTune won't work.
I am all on board with what would be a better overclock, but I just want to compare apples to apples.
I've never use Easy Tune...since it looks kinda alienated to me. :0
It's a PITA to restart every time...but that works for me.
This time, Tthe above 21*190 Turbo I had to input most voltages manually unlike before. I'm still trying to refine it. Probably needed more Vcore. (this 190bclk was impossible to boot into Windows with AUTO settings)
You know, I would love to believe straight ocing is better than Turboboost so yesterday I was back and gave it another try. But, I don't think so. Even Prime stopped....cpu fan still flying at 1500rpm to get it cool. It annoys me
At 4.30GHz & 4.40GHz were pretty tough to get a decent bench.
Here is my setting for that 21*190bclk Turbo...input manually...see if it could be applied. (all Turbo before this were on AUTO most setting)
I just spent a few hours trying to get stable with Power saving functions on and Turbo.
I just don't seem to have as much luck as you, and I am not gonna take my extra ram out of my board.
I am currently running Prime on my 175X21 Bclk @ 1.425V. It nets me about the same overclock as my 4200MHz @ 1.475V with turbo off. After I have 1 hour prime stable, I will run 3DMark06 and compare with my 4200 MHz overclock.
I doubt that it is my ram speed, but the fact that everyone seems to agree that you get a higher overclock when using less ram seems to apply here.
Either way, its a nice OC. Like you I prefer the power saving options for noise sake. Chip runs much cooler as well. I will save my OC for if I have to do any benching competitions. Besides, with 175 Bclk, the turbo is actually almost 50MHz faster than when I run it at 4200 LOL!
I will probably try one day to do overclocking with only 4 gigs, but I just don't feel like the hassle.
Edit:
WHOAHHHHH BOYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYY!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
So I ran Prime for 1 hour stable, then decided to run 3DMark06.
Well even with prime stable, I was not able to complete a 3DMark06 or PassmarkRun, so I ended up lowering my Bclk to 172 instead of 175.
My 3DMarkScore went from 20188 to 11587.
Passmark score dropped by almost 1000
So I ran Cinebench, and it was slower too.
I guess it wil be back to the Old School Overclock for me.
There must be something. There is no way your 3DMarkScore could have drop almost 50%.
In multi-threaded apps, lower bclk won't be able to compete with higher bclk.
My CinebenchR10 score differences for 183bclk turbo vs non-turbo is little.....but I get a supercharged hi-tech dual core beast within ) that's how it felt like )
Anyway, I can't get it stable at 190bclk turbo. I'm happy at 185bclk Turbo. I'm done.
This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.
