1. #3441
    Quote Originally Posted by Xuvial View Post
    5ghz OC with a Hyper212? Temps/voltages/proof please
    [mod warning: Yea, pictures wider than 800 pixels are not allowed here. Thumbnail it.]
    Last edited by tetrisGOAT; 2011-09-25 at 04:39 AM.

  2. #3442

  3. #3443
    Scarab Lord Xuvial's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    New Zealand
    Posts
    4,963
    Dazmar, have you tried stress testing? Because 46c max temps @ 5ghz with a hyper212 = impossible

  4. #3444
    Quote Originally Posted by DeltrusDisc View Post
    Scary voltages.
    explain?

    Quote Originally Posted by Xuvial View Post
    Dazmar, have you tried stress testing? Because 46c max temps @ 5ghz with a hyper212 = impossible
    max temp after 2 hours of prime95 was 68

  5. #3445
    Pit Lord conqq's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Ohio, USA
    Posts
    2,422
    Newegg package tracking is a curse... ETA date is Tuesday for my card. I'm sitting here staring at my empty case and PSU wondering how I'm going to do cable management and if there are enough ports on my Mobo for the top-ports of the case

  6. #3446
    Scarab Lord Xuvial's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    New Zealand
    Posts
    4,963
    Quote Originally Posted by dazmar View Post
    explain?



    max temp after 2 hours of prime95 was 68
    Amazing, definitely a 1 out of 1000 chip there.

  7. #3447
    Titan DeltrusDisc's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Location
    Illinois, USA
    Posts
    14,868
    Explanation: 1.39v is pretty damn high for Sandybridge, I don't really expect your chip to last very long if you keep it at that voltage and overclock long. I honestly hope you downclock it to at least 4.8GHz. You can say you have a 5.0GHz capable chip, but honestly, especially with just a 212+ cooler... I would not push it.

  8. #3448
    Scarab Lord Xuvial's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    New Zealand
    Posts
    4,963
    Quote Originally Posted by DeltrusDisc View Post
    1.39v is pretty damn high for Sandybridge
    Where are you getting this from? People regularly run 1.35-1.5v for overclocking purposes. Voltage doesn't matter, it has absolutely no significance - it's temperatures that damage the chip. As long as temps are acceptable, you can put whatever voltage through it you want. There's people putting 1.55-1.6v to obtain 5ghz+ overclocks and 1.39v sounds unbelievable.

  9. #3449
    Mechagnome Vanthem's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Location
    Ol US of A
    Posts
    735
    Quote Originally Posted by Xuvial View Post
    Where are you getting this from? People regularly run 1.35-1.5v for overclocking purposes. Voltage doesn't matter, it has absolutely no significance - it's temperatures that damage the chip. As long as temps are acceptable, you can put whatever voltage through it you want. There's people putting 1.55-1.6v to obtain 5ghz+ overclocks and 1.39v sounds unbelievable.
    I personally will not go over 1.4. I will take the highest OC with good temps below 1.4v and I'm satisfied. I want the damn thing to last a bit lol

  10. #3450

  11. #3451
    Moderator Cilraaz's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Location
    PA, USA
    Posts
    9,023
    Quote Originally Posted by DeltrusDisc View Post
    Explanation: 1.39v is pretty damn high for Sandybridge
    Absolutely incorrect. Max VID on an i5 2500k is 1.52v. Running at 1.52v without LLC is considered borderline. 1.52v without LLC vdroops to about 1.4v. In turn, 1.4v with an LLC level that maintains voltage (aka doesn't allow voltage to raise under load) is typically considered the safe limit. As far as I know, dazmar hasn't stated his LLC setting, so he's somewhere between 0.1v and 0.13v from the upper voltage limit.

    Quote Originally Posted by Xuvial View Post
    Voltage doesn't matter, it has absolutely no significance - it's temperatures that damage the chip.
    Also absolutely incorrect. Either temperature or voltage can insta-kill a CPU. Voltage, however, is more likely to cause degredation over a period of time (days, weeks, months... it depends).

  12. #3452
    Scarab Lord Xuvial's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    New Zealand
    Posts
    4,963
    Hmm. Those guys shoving 1.6v-1.7v+ though their chips must either aiming at suicide runs or very short-lived chips.

  13. #3453

  14. #3454
    Quote Originally Posted by Xuvial View Post
    Hmm. Those guys shoving 1.6v-1.7v+ though their chips must either aiming at suicide runs or very short-lived chips.
    More or less? Yes.

  15. #3455
    The games themselves letterbox 16:10 almost all the time
    I was running my x360 with a 20" 16:10 monitor and ALL games ran at full resolution without letterboxes. However, the console must be configured manually for 16:10 in the settings, it doesn't detect proper resolution automatically. I wish i could give you a photo to prove my point, but i already changed that monitor to 27" 16:9.
    Last edited by anb; 2011-09-25 at 01:01 PM.
    http://www.youtube.com/user/Anball2

    MSI GTX 560 Ti | Crucial M4 64GB

  16. #3456
    TOTALLY NOT
    Banned
    tetrisGOAT's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    Sweden
    Posts
    12,452
    Quote Originally Posted by Xuvial View Post
    Hmm. Those guys shoving 1.6v-1.7v+ though their chips must either aiming at suicide runs or very short-lived chips.
    Yea. Unaccounting for the random factor, 1.6v will still make it outlive its usefulness, in the sense they'll just upgrade next generation anyway. The joy of being an enthusiast. :P

  17. #3457
    Titan DeltrusDisc's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Location
    Illinois, USA
    Posts
    14,868
    I could have sworn I read on overclockers.net or somewhere that 1.4v is when you start getting into the unsafe zone for the Sandybridges. My mistake. All these numbers get confusing. >_<

  18. #3458
    Herald of the Titans Rixis's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Location
    Hyrule
    Posts
    2,982
    i thought intel had recommended no higher than about 1.525, 1.4-1.435 ish isthe recommended/usual number for 47x - 48/49x turbos though
    Quote Originally Posted by Meysvindu View Post
    Edit: I'm sorry, this sounded like what Rixis would say so I edited it out.
    Thinking like I do is fine, but saying it like I do is not.

  19. #3459
    Titan DeltrusDisc's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Location
    Illinois, USA
    Posts
    14,868
    Quote Originally Posted by Rixis View Post
    i thought intel had recommended no higher than about 1.525, 1.4-1.435 ish isthe recommended/usual number for 47x - 48/49x turbos though
    Until I find a new job, I won't be pushing my CPU any further and I am considering dropping it back down to 4.4GHz where I had 0 BSOD's when I got the proper voltages, every now and then when my computer is idling and folding via GPU, I've had BSOD's. 2 so far. If I get a new job though I might try and push 4.8GHz, because I know I plan to get Ivybridge next year anyways.

  20. #3460
    My CPU's back at 3.3 GHz till I figure out how to operate the multiplier on Asus boards. :P

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •