OMG What a chip

[SmellyDraws]

Man who cares bout that extra 100mghz. It would have been nice to see but you just did what alot of ppl cannot do with their 2.8ghz. chips.

 

[Rasputin'sLiver]

As an enthusiastic overclocker, I just want to share my joy and excitement with the fellow overclockers. I believe that nothing beats finding a monstrously overclockable chip for those never satisfied overclockers like I am.


p.s. Pardon my bad English

as demonstrated by the comment above, you're speaking our language fine.

 

[Rasputin'sLiver]

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: WHERE ARE YOU MR. NATURAL? I WANT 1.85VOLTS WITH OUT A COLD BOOT PROBLEM!

if you put the wire on tight, it should stay on when you switch. also, that will see what kind of th7II you have, its running at 158fsb right now. would be nice to see if you could run it at 177 or so, without problems.

hmmm. if i wasn't stuck watching the baby, i'd try it right now!

 

[micamica1217]

Hi Mica - I'm running 40b for the extra volts. i have the 7e, but what is the defoger mod?

40b is rock solid except for cold boots which is really a minor inconvenience to me since i rarely cold boot this machine... even when i do, i get it running without too much trouble

the defoger mod is were you paint the holes that the cpu pins slide in. instead of wire raping...just paint the holes with rear window defoger repair kit. then use a pin or toothpic to open the holes and slide the cpu in after it dries. it's just too easy and only costs about $10 at the auto store. then use the 7e bios that I think I sent you. now you cant use any cpu at any voltage you want....w/o cold boot problems. so much better then the 40b.

send me an email or a PM and I can walk you through it on the phone.

jd, talk to me about the drcg chips....this is only for the memory or somthing???

formosian,

btw, thats some great OC you have there.

mica

 

[micamica1217]

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: WHERE ARE YOU MR. NATURAL? I WANT 1.85VOLTS WITH OUT A COLD BOOT PROBLEM!

hmmm. if i wasn't stuck watching the baby, i'd try it right now!

it's never too early to teach the young'ns....let the baby try it.

mica

 

[jdmcnudgent]

about the drcg chips....this is only for the memory or somthing???

yes, the drcg chips are memory related.

 

[jdmcnudgent]

Ok guys looks like the party is over.
After about 1 day bruning in, she still refuses to stay stable at 3.6GHz no matter what votages which the max is 1.725V for IT7. At 3.5GHz, you can just throw about anything to her and rock solid.

Regarding the seti bench stuff, I will give it a shot later on when I come back from work. So stay tune.

I really don't care about people who believe this amazing overclock or not. As an enthusiastic overclocker, I just want to share my joy and excitement with the fellow overclockers. I believe that nothing beats finding a monstrously overclockable chip for those never satisfied overclockers like I am.

Anyway IMHO a 3.5GHz air cooling chip is just about the best you can find on this planet at this momnet. I think it will stop my hunger of hunting a good chip for a while.

p.s. Pardon my bad English

its OK dude if you cant do 3600. 3500 is just fine, and i mentioned earlier in a post, you prolly have the best chip on the planet.

 

[Rasputin'sLiver]

the defoger mod is were you paint the holes that the cpu pins slide in. instead of wire raping...just paint the holes with rear window defoger repair kit.
mica

doh! this is one of those magic days where my brain shut down... now i remember that mod... never tried it though. sounds like its working great for you!

 

[micamica1217]

yes, the drcg chips are memory related.

but how???

I think you can't go over pc1200 or so speed...am I close or somthing???

and how does it hold it back?

mica

 

[jdmcnudgent]

but how???

I think you can't go over pc1200 or so speed...am I close or somthing???

and how does it hold it back?

mica

certain chips on the board hold the mem back. people have soddered better chips on in hopes to take their board higher. for more info, check here, these are the search results for drcg chips.

 

[micamica1217]

certain chips on the board hold the mem back. people have soddered better chips on in hopes to take their board higher. for more info, check here, these are the search results for drcg chips.

thanks jd,

but what I'm getting at is some peeps had crappy boards....bad capasiters next to cpu gave undervolting, the drcg's holding back the memory and so on.

yet it seems that ras, azn and I got the good boards...the ones that don't undervolt and have no hold backs from the drcgs and such.

I just could not use kingston 1066....thats not bad.

pc948 speed is very fast.

mica

 

[jdmcnudgent]

thanks jd,

but what I'm getting at is some peeps had crappy boards....bad capasiters next to cpu gave undervolting, the drcg's holding back the memory and so on.

yet it seems that ras, azn and I got the good boards...the ones that don't undervolt and have no hold backs from the drcgs and such.

I just could not use kingston 1066....thats not bad.

pc948 speed is very fast.

mica

yes, all of your boards are nice boards, but it is holding up my theory of not being very nice above 165fsb.

 

[lutjens]

That's one helluva chip....that chip's yields are about the same as what a new 3.06's yields. Intel must have been really hard up for 1.8 CPU's (Dell was probably screaming for more of them) and Intel was forced to speed bin some of the faster chips to satisfy their order.

I doubt they'd do the same for retail channels. They knew what they were doing when they remarked the faster chips as slower ones, but I guess they justified it by knowing that Dell is an OEM builder with no overclocking at all. So by speed binning the chips they wouldn't be losing anything (as they would potentially in the retail market).

 

[micamica1217]

yes, all of your boards are nice boards, but it is holding up my theory of not being very nice above 165fsb.

I still dont understand.....I can do above 165fsb.

mica

 

[micamica1217]

That's one helluva chip....that chip's yields are about the same as what a new 3.06's yields. Intel must have been really hard up for 1.8 CPU's (Dell was probably screaming for more of them) and Intel was forced to speed bin some of the faster chips to satisfy their order.

I doubt they'd do the same for retail channels. They knew what they were doing when they remarked the faster chips as slower ones, but I guess they justified it by knowing that Dell is an OEM builder with no overclocking at all. So by speed binning the chips they wouldn't be losing anything (as they would potentially in the retail market).

if intel wanted to cruch AMD real fast all they have to do is send out every C1 1.8a like the one here......I know I'll buy two.

who else is game?

mica

 

[jdmcnudgent]

I still dont understand.....I can do above 165fsb.

mica

you stated that you tested up to 164, get it stable at 170-175, prime stable, seti stable, and then come talk to me, you ARE wett.

 

[AZN]

i did 173 FSB stable and i went as high as 177fsb but the cpu was not stable. If i can keep the chip cooler i can go 180 NP. the th7ii chipset does not flake out that easy but my chip did.

AZN

 

[Big Nuttz]

Re: Re: Re: Re: WHERE ARE YOU MR. NATURAL? I WANT 1.85VOLTS WITH OUT A COLD BOOT PROBLEM!

you're right jd. but remember when you helped me do the wire mod several months ago on my 2.26b? it was such a hassle with my big hands and bad eyes that i've just left it alone in my bd72-raid where it's humming along happily at just under 3ghz. the th7II is the better overclocking option though with rambus and all...

I can do it really good and they call me bananna hands.

 

[jdmcnudgent]

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: WHERE ARE YOU MR. NATURAL? I WANT 1.85VOLTS WITH OUT A COLD BOOT PROBLEM!

I can do it really good and they call me bananna hands.

whad you say bananna hands??

 

[lutjens]

if intel wanted to cruch AMD real fast all they have to do is send out every C1 1.8a like the one here......I know I'll buy two.

Intel likely doesn't want to crush AMD (having the two of them keep the DOJ off of Intel's back). Intel also sell's the slower chips at a much lower profit vs their flagship chips. If they speed binned all chips, they wouldn't sell any high speed ones to us end users. We'd just buy cheap 1.8A chips and overclock. Good for us and bad for Intel's profits (meaning that it will never happen).

They can (and do), in a pinch, remark fast chips as slow ones, but they'll likely only do it for a close OEM partner like Dell, where the true potential of the chip will never be realized (where they'd make the retail channel wait for production to catch up with lower speed chips). Kind of a shame really, but it's reality.

The 1.8A in question is almost certainly a remarked 3.06. What I'm really wondering is if Intel disconnected the Hyper-Threading in them (as Dell is unikely to have options to enable it in the BIOS). I'm thinking maybe they left it enabled knowing that it would likely never be used and simply burned in the new multiplier and name string into the 3.06 chip to make it a 1.8A.

That 1.8A with Hyper-Threading enabled would be a very hot piece of property (that many people would pay dearly to get their hands on--myself included).